Atheism and Contradiction

Timmy asks:

Short answer: Yes. 

Long answer: The Millerian Cosmological Argument sets aside the principle of sufficient reason and instead runs an argument to God from finite beings as contradictory structures (and therefore impossible) unless they are caused to exist ultimately by a being whose essence just is its existence. (For those interested, I provide a brief overview of this argument in my recent interview with Christopher  Cloos here.)

I believe the argument is sound, but it would be foolish to think it is an argument that goes through quickly. For one thing, it requires articulating and defending the constituent ontology of Thomas Aquinas, which Miller does. This includes, but is not limited to, the commitment that existence is a first level property, something that concrete individuals have.

In other words, the existence of God is a logical entailment from the occurrence of contingent beings from within that metaphysical system. One can, of course, reject that metaphysical system – or attempt to – to escape the force of the argument. Personally, I don’t think that metaphysical system, or at least the components required to run the Millerian argument, can be coherently denied, but that’s a significantly larger conversation – one, in fact, that Miller engaged throughout his career, culminating in The Fullness of Being.

More on Miller’s argument soon.

In the meantime, Joshua Rasmussen also thinks you can draw a contradiction from atheism. His is a different approach than Miller’s, but worthy of consideration.