Skip to main content
EnglandReligious StudiesSyllabus dot point

How strong are the design, cosmological and ontological arguments for the existence of God, and how have their critics answered them?

Paper 1 Philosophical issues and questions: the inductive design and cosmological arguments and the deductive ontological argument for the existence of God, with the responses of Hume, Kant, Russell and Dawkins.

An Edexcel A-Level Religious Studies Paper 1 guide to the arguments for the existence of God. Covers the design argument (Aquinas, Paley) and Hume and Darwin's replies, the cosmological argument (Aquinas, Leibniz) and Hume and Russell's replies, and the ontological argument (Anselm) with Gaunilo, Kant and Russell, plus the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.

Generated by Claude Opus 4.816 min answer

Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed

Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page

Jump to a section
  1. What this dot point is asking
  2. The answer
  3. Examples in context
  4. Try this

What this dot point is asking

Edexcel Paper 1 opens with philosophical issues and questions, the headline issue being whether reason can establish that God exists. You study three classic arguments: the design and cosmological arguments, which are inductive (reasoning from features of the world to a probable God), and the ontological argument, which is deductive (God's existence follows from the definition of God alone). The exam rewards understanding each argument precisely and then evaluating it against its named critics.

The answer

The design (teleological) argument

The strongest modern restatement is the anthropic or fine-tuning version: the physical constants of the universe appear precisely calibrated for life, which proponents say design explains better than chance.

Replies to the design argument

  • Hume (before Paley) argues the analogy is weak: the universe is not much like a machine, we have no other universes to compare, and order could arise from chance over vast time; the argument cannot prove a single, perfect or benevolent designer.
  • Darwin's natural selection (1859) gives a non-design explanation of apparent biological purpose: design appears through the survival of advantageous variations, removing the need for a designer.
  • Richard Dawkins develops this: complexity is the end of an evolutionary process, not its starting cause, so design "explains nothing" and merely relocates the problem.

The cosmological argument

Replies to the cosmological argument

  • Hume denies we can move from a finite universe to an infinite cause, and questions whether the universe must have a cause at all; causation is a habit of mind, not a proven necessity.
  • Russell, debating Copleston in 1948, calls the universe a brute fact ("the universe is just there, and that's all") and accuses the argument of the fallacy of composition: because each part has a cause it does not follow that the whole does.
  • Kant holds that the argument illegitimately extends causation, a category of experience, beyond all experience to a transcendent cause.

The ontological argument

Replies to the ontological argument

  • Gaunilo parodies the form with the "perfect island": by the same logic the greatest conceivable island would have to exist, which is absurd, so the argument is invalid.
  • Kant objects that existence is not a predicate: saying a thing exists adds nothing to its concept, so "exists" cannot be part of what makes God the greatest being. A hundred real coins contain no more in their concept than a hundred imagined coins.
  • Russell judges the argument "easier to feel convinced it is wrong than to find out where it goes wrong", treating "exists" as a quantifier, not a property.

Examples in context

Try this

Q1. Evaluate the view that the design argument is fatally undermined by the theory of evolution. [20 marks]

  • What the marker wants. An AO2 essay setting Paley and the fine-tuning argument against Hume, Darwin and Dawkins, weighing whether evolution removes the need for a designer or only explains biological (not cosmological) order, with a justified conclusion.

Q2. Explain Anselm's ontological argument for the existence of God. [8 marks]

  • Cue. God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived; existence in reality is greater than existence in the mind alone; therefore the greatest conceivable being must exist in reality. Add Anselm's second form on necessary existence for the higher marks.

Exam-style practice questions

Practice questions written in the style of Pearson Edexcel exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.

Edexcel 201820 marksEvaluate the view that the cosmological argument proves the existence of God.
Show worked answer →

A Section C extended essay marked mainly on AO2. Levels-based marking rewards a sustained, balanced argument with named scholars and a justified conclusion, not a description of the argument.

Set out the argument. Aquinas's first three Ways (motion, causation, contingency) reason from the world to a necessary first cause that is God; Leibniz adds the principle of sufficient reason demanding an explanation for why anything exists.

Evaluate. Hume attacks the move from a finite effect to an infinite cause and questions whether the universe needs a cause at all; Russell holds the universe is "just there" and that calling it caused commits a fallacy of composition. Kant argues existence is not a predicate, undercutting the necessary being.

Judge. A high-level answer decides whether "proof" is the right word (the argument is at best inductive and probabilistic) and supports the verdict. Reaching a clear, defended conclusion is what lifts the response to the top level.

Edexcel 202020 marksAnalyse the strengths of the ontological argument as a proof of God's existence.
Show worked answer →

A Section C essay testing AO1 understanding and AO2 evaluation of the deductive argument.

Explain. Anselm defines God as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived"; a being that exists in reality is greater than one existing only in the mind, so God must exist in reality or would not be the greatest conceivable being.

Strengths. It is a priori and deductive, so if sound it gives certainty without relying on contested empirical evidence; it captures the logic of a perfect being.

Weaknesses to weigh. Gaunilo's "perfect island" parodies the form; Kant's objection that existence is not a real predicate denies that adding existence makes a concept greater; Russell later judged the argument easier to dismiss than to refute.

A top answer judges how convincing the strengths remain once these replies are weighed, and concludes with reasons.

Related dot points

Sources & how we know this