Ambiguity in the Kalām Cosmological Argument: Exposing the Limits of First-Order Predicate Logic
In this paper, I apply Graham Priest’s logical critique of the cosmological argument to the Kalām Cosmological Argument (KCA), focusing on a key ambiguity in its first premise: "Whatever begins to exist has a cause." When formalized in first-order predicate logic (FOL), this premise admits...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Published: |
2025
|
| In: |
Sophia
Year: 2025, Volume: 64, Issue: 4, Pages: 615-649 |
| Further subjects: | B
Graham Priest
B Second-Order modal logic B Kalām cosmological argument B Logical ambiguity B First-Order predicate logic |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000naa a22000002c 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1948046644 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20260108111710.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 260108s2025 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s11841-025-01093-7 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1948046644 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1948046644 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |e VerfasserIn |0 (DE-588)1200877128 |0 (DE-627)1683874315 |4 aut |a Ahsan, Abbas |d ca. 20./21. Jh. | |
| 109 | |a Ahsan, Abbas ca. 20./21. Jh. | ||
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Ambiguity in the Kalām Cosmological Argument: Exposing the Limits of First-Order Predicate Logic |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2025 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a In this paper, I apply Graham Priest’s logical critique of the cosmological argument to the Kalām Cosmological Argument (KCA), focusing on a key ambiguity in its first premise: "Whatever begins to exist has a cause." When formalized in first-order predicate logic (FOL), this premise admits two non-equivalent interpretations. One of which allows for multiple distinct causes while another posits a single universal cause. This logical ambiguity reveals a limitation of FOL in expressing metaphysical claims with the necessary precision. By extension, this ambiguity undermines the structural coherence of the KCA when expressed in FOL. My central aim is not to refute the KCA’s conclusion but to demonstrate that its first-order formulation lacks logical determinacy. To address this, I develop a second-order modal logical (SOML) framework that incorporates functional mappings, uniqueness constraints, and metaphysical necessity. This revised formalism eliminates the ambiguity while preserving the KCA’s philosophical commitments. | ||
| 601 | |a Argumentation | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a First-Order predicate logic | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Graham Priest | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Kalām cosmological argument | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Logical ambiguity | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Second-Order modal logic | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Sophia |d Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands, 1962 |g 64(2025), 4, Seite 615-649 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)543988392 |w (DE-600)2386792-9 |w (DE-576)271774215 |x 1873-930X |7 nnas |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:64 |g year:2025 |g number:4 |g pages:615-649 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-025-01093-7 |x Resolving-System |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |7 1 |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 4841335161 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1948046644 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20260108100931 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 260108||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixzo | ||
| LOK | |0 939 |a 08-01-26 |b l01 | ||
| ORI | |a TA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||
