The Taxicab Fallacy

Leibniz's Cosmological argument is as follows:

1. Everything that exists has an explanation of its existence.
2. If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God.
3. The universe exists.

When one claims that premise 1 is true of everything in the universe, but is not true of the universe itself, they are guilty of the "taxicab fallacy."  Meaning, they are claiming that everything in the universe has an explanation, but that the universe itself does not.

Philosopher William Lane Craig explains:

"...as the nineteenth-century atheist philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer quipped, premise 1 can't be dismissed like a hack once you've arrived at your desired destination!  You can't say everything has an explanation of its existence and then suddenly exempt the universe." [1]

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Footnote:

1. William Lane Craig, On Guard, p. 57.


Comments

Trina said…
Why is "claiming everything in the universe has an explanation, but the universe itself does not" committing the "taxicab fallacy"? I am having trouble understanding what the taxicab fallacy is. Kindly clarify. Thanks!