Philosophy, Department of

 

Department of Philosophy: Faculty Publications

Accessibility Remediation

If you are unable to use this item in its current form due to accessibility barriers, you may request remediation through our remediation request form.

Document Type

Article

Date of this Version

2014

Citation

Religious Studies (2014) 50, pp. 27–46. doi:10.1017/S0034412513000140

Comments

© Cambridge University Press 2013. Used by permission.

Abstract

William Lane Craig’s defence of the kalam cosmological argument rests heavily on two philosophical arguments against a past-eternal universe. In this article I take issue with one of these arguments, what I call the ‘Hilbert’s Hotel Argument’ – namely, that the metaphysical absurdity of an actually infinite number of things existing precludes the possibility of a beginningless past. After explaining this argument, I proceed to raise some initial doubts. After setting those aside, I show that the argument is ineffective against proponents of presentism. The remainder of the article considers and rejects possible replies on Craig’s behalf.

Share

COinS