Is the Cosmological Argument valid?
Google Web Definitions:
Valid - (of an argument or point) having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent.
Side Score: 2
Side Score: 1
Here is the general sum of the cosmological argument:
1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The Universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the Universe had a cause.
Yes, this is perfectly valid. Same way this is valid.
1. All Pop-Tarts are tasty.
2. Apples are tasty.
3. Apples are Pop-Tarts.
This is valid, but the premises aren't true. This argument wouldn't be sound. So returning to the cosmological argument...premise 2 may stop some people. Since we don't know if the universe truly began or merely always was. We just accept the notion that it may have been created. I probably was. I have no clue.
In conclusion, yes. The cosmological argument is valid, but may not be particularly sound.
Side: Yes because...
P1: Whatever begins to exist had a cause
P2: The universe began to exist
C: Therefore the universe had a cause
P2: Is based on an assumption that is yet to attain validity.
All ideas about a beginning to the universe remain theory with little else to support them.
Therefore the argument, needing both P1 + P2 to reach C is not logically valid
Side: No because...