ipl-logo

Analyzing Nicolas Malebranche's Occasionalism

988 Words4 Pages

Marc Wilk Dr. Kaufman PHIL3010 November 30, 2014 Short Paper: Malebranche’s Occasionalism Nicolas Malebranche (1638-1715) was a French philosopher and also a devout Christian. In order to incorporate his Christian beliefs into philosophy, he established his own doctrine of occasionalism. That is, there is only one true cause for every effect; the true cause being God. All other natural causes are just occasional causes. Malebranche gives many different arguments in favor of his idea. Most importantly, the argument from ‘no necessary connection’ which states, “there are no necessary connections between events involving only creatures. Therefore, there are no true causes in events involving only creatures.” He uses this argument heavily in favor …show more content…

There are three aspects of occasionalism that all correlate. First, the negative aspect, which infers that all creatures (living things, humans) have no true causal powers. Second, the positive aspect, which infers that God is the true cause of every effect. Third, the lawfulness aspect, which infers that God does it all but only in accordance to His laws that He has established. For example, when you accidently stub your toe into a wall you feel pain. For Malebranche, this pain is just the result of one of God’s occasions. Additionally, the physical pain that you experience, acts as an occasion for God to cause the mental pain. A better example might be a soccer ball hitting another soccer ball. The impact that soccer ball number one has on soccer ball number two is an occasion for God to move the soccer ball. In both examples, God is the sole cause of the …show more content…

The formal argument goes as stated above, “there are no necessary connections between events involving only creatures. Therefore, there are no true causes in events involving only creatures.” Although I believe it should be stated as, 1. For every cause, there is an effect. 2. The mind perceives a necessary connection between every cause and effect. 3. This necessary connection is only held true by an infinite, all power, all good being. 4. Therefore, God is the only true cause for every effect, leaving all creatures (humans),

Show More
Related
482 Words | 2 Pages

In a definitional sense, by this framework, primary causality is that which God does, and secondary causality is that which creatures do in accordance with natural law. Regarding evolution, this framework does not suggest that responsibility does not fall in an “either/or” sense, but rather, O’Callaghan claims, “God does it all” (282). God’s creative act and the scientific account of human origins do not have to be in conflict according to O’Callaghan’s framework because God causes the natural causes to operate, and He sustains their effects and results. “God is involved in all evolutionary process as primary cause to the secondary” O’Callaghan writes (290).

Read More
655 Words | 3 Pages

(SIP-A) The logical fallacy it uses is false cause. (STEWE-1) False cause occurs when one thing is incorrectly seen as the cause of another thing. This usually happens as a presumption that a relation between two events is evidence for a cause-effect between those events.

Read More
87 Words | 1 Pages

How would you feel if you decided to ride you bike from Monument, Massachusetts all the way to Rutterburg,Vermont? In the book I am the Cheese by Robert Cormier, Adam is a 14 year old boy decided to ride his bike all across the world. During Adam 's journey he meets a lot of generous people such as Arnold and Edna. Adam go some help by very generous people. Adam explains an Extremely crazy journey in this book.

Read More
2217 Words | 9 Pages

Otherwise, there would be no argument to cause the

Read More
507 Words | 3 Pages

All their afflictions come from us, we hear. And what of their own failings?” (page 2). The gods, although they are powerful, cannot prevent every wrongful decision made by man, yet men do not blame themselves but turn to supernatural causes

Read More
1054 Words | 5 Pages

Daniel Ertel Professor Hunt Phil 1010-01 October 1st, 2016 Is Gods Existence compatible with the existence of evil? One of the most dated arguments on the topic of God’s existence is whether its’ existence is compatible with the existence of evil. In his dissertation, “The Problem of Evil,” by Richard Swinburne, he attempts to demonstrate how evil can coexist in a world created by an omnipotent (all-powerful) and benevolent being. In his first objection, he argues that there is an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God in a universe that contains coexisting forces.

Read More
871 Words | 4 Pages

The objection addressed the validity of the argument which had the premise 1, nothing is the efficient cause of itself except God and premise 2, a chain of causes cannot be infinite. The argument thus concludes there must be a first cause. This conclusion agrees with my thesis that Saint Thomas Aquinas’s argument formulated in the second way leads to a valid argument, which concludes that there must be a first cause and that God

Read More
492 Words | 2 Pages

Fong-Wei Ting Mr. Mahoney Apologetics November 24 2014 Key Arguments for and against the existence of God God is defined as the perfect and all-powerful spirit or being that is worshiped especially by the Christian, Jews and Muslims as the One who created and rules the universe.1 There are many people who do not believe in a God, and with a lack of faith, they argue against the existence of God and are proving something that is completely false or unrelated. There are a large number of reasons proving God to be real. This essay is to prove the existence of God, and within this essay are twelve reasons that prove God does exist.

Read More
1797 Words | 8 Pages

So the first cause argument proves that God does not exist assuming the first cause argument is sound then there must be some other cause because it is not God. In summary the notion of omnipotent is a miss-name because it implies the potency, power, causality when in fact all that it does is imply logical entailment, it implies that if it wills something you can deduce from the statement that something exists, you do not need a causal step, it is a logical deduction and therefore the first cause argument argues from causes in the world

Read More
1532 Words | 7 Pages

In Christian tradition, the existence of God is central to the religion and the practices and beliefs associated with it. In this tradition, God can be conceived of as an all powerful, immortal and transcendent being who governs and creates the world as it is known. During the Medieval Era Christianity dominated Europe, leading to an extensive amount of philosophical and scholarly works related to God and how to properly conceive of him. As a result, many philosophical topics and theories were brought under examination in an attempt to combine them with Christian ideologies and conceptions of God and the world. One of the many topics brought under consideration was free will.

Read More
2363 Words | 10 Pages

Remember that for Aristotle meant something different than what we intend when we say cause. We are referring to an action or event that occurred prior to another. For Aristotle, causes meant explanation. This explanation works fine for a man made article, so how does he explain cause in nature?

Read More
981 Words | 4 Pages

Instead the belief revolves around the idea that natural causes are sufficient to explain everything that exists in the

Read More
1784 Words | 8 Pages

The traditional claim of all Cosmological Arguments is defined as “something outside the universe is responsible to explain the existence of the universe” (PowerPoint 380). In the “causal argument,” or the First Cause Argument on the cosmological argument, “something” outside of the universe that is supposed to inform us about the existence of the universe is argued to be explained as God. As the first cause argument goes into depth and with the help of Thomas Aquinas, it is easy to see how God is responsible for explaining the existence of the universe around us. Within the first cause argument on the cosmological argument the following premises and conclusions are discussed: Premise 1: There exists things that are caused. Meaning that

Read More
877 Words | 4 Pages

On the other hand, theists like Swinburne, believe that evil is necessary for important reasons such as that it helps us grow and improve. In this paper I will argue that the theist is right, because the good of the evil in this specific case on problems beyond one’s control, outweighs the bad that comes from it. I will begin by stating the objection the anti-theodicist gives for why it is wrong that there is a problem of evil. (<--fix) Regarding passive evil not caused by human action, the anti-theodicist claims that there is an issue with a creator, God, allowing a world to exist where evil things happen, which are not caused by human beings (180-181).

Read More
915 Words | 4 Pages

In his first-cause argument, he states that everything we are able to observe has a cause and that nothing can cause itself. In order for something to cause itself, it would have to exist prior to itself, which is impossible. Nor can something be caused by an infinite regress of causes. (Vaughn, Lewis. Pg.

Read More

More about Analyzing Nicolas Malebranche's Occasionalism

Related Topics

Open Document