Islamic philosophy enriches the tradition, developing two types of arguments.
First philosophy[ edit ] Aristotle argues, in Book 8 of the Physics and Book 12 of the Metaphysics"that there must be an immortal, unchanging being, ultimately responsible for all wholeness and orderliness in the sensible world".
But he does point out rightly that the unmoved mover fits the definition of an efficient cause—"whence the first source of change or rest" Phys. The examples which Aristotle adduces do not obviously suggest an application to the first unmoved mover, and it is at least possible that Aristotle originated his fourfold distinction without reference to such an entity.
But the real question is whether, given his definition of the efficient cause, it includes the unmoved mover willy-nilly. One curious fact remains: Graham, Physics Despite their apparent function in the celestial model, the unmoved movers were a final causenot an efficient cause for the movement of the spheres;  they were solely a constant inspiration,  and even if taken for an efficient cause precisely due to being a final cause,  the nature of the explanation is purely teleological.
It is clear then that there is neither place, nor void, nor time, outside the heaven. Hence whatever is there, is of such a nature as not to occupy any place, nor does time age it; nor is there any change in any of the things which lie beyond the outermost motion; they continue through their entire duration unalterable and unmodified, living the best and most self sufficient of lives… From [the fulfilment of the whole heaven] derive the being and life which other things, some more or less articulately but other feebly, enjoy.
As such, it would be physically impossible for them to move material objects of any size by pushing, pulling or collision. Because matter is, for Aristotle, a substratum in which a potential to change can be actualized, any and all potentiality must be actualized in a being that is eternal but it must not be still, because continuous activity is essential for all forms of life.
This immaterial form of activity must be intellectual in nature and it cannot be contingent upon sensory perception if it is to remain uniform; therefore eternal substance must think only of thinking itself and exist outside the starry sphere, where even the notion of place is undefined for Aristotle.
Their influence on lesser beings is purely the result of an "aspiration or desire",  and each aetheric celestial sphere emulates one of the unmoved movers, as best it can, by uniform circular motion.
The first heaven, the outmost sphere of fixed stars, is moved by a desire to emulate the prime mover first cause  in relation to whom, the subordinate movers suffer an accidental dependency. As the whole of nature depends on the inspiration of the eternal unmoved movers, Aristotle was concerned to establish the metaphysical necessity of the perpetual motions of the heavens.
It is through the seasonal action of the Sun upon the terrestrial spheres, that the cycles of generation and corruption give rise to all natural motion as efficient cause. It is also the most sustainable, pleasant, self-sufficient activity;  something which is aimed at for its own sake.
This aim is not strictly human, to achieve it means to live in accordance not with mortal thoughts, but something immortal and divine which is within humans. According to Aristotle, contemplation is the only type of happy activity which it would not be ridiculous to imagine the gods having.
He argues that in the beginning, if the cosmos had come to be, its first motion would lack an antecedent state, and as Parmenides said, " nothing comes from nothing ". The cosmological argumentlater attributed to Aristotle, thereby draws the conclusion that God exists.
However, if the cosmos had a beginning, Aristotle argued, it would require an efficient first cause, a notion that Aristotle took to demonstrate a critical flaw.
But if substances can, then all things can perish Now, the only continuous change is that of place, and the only continuous change of place is circular motion.
He notes that sensible substance is changeable and that there are several types of change, including quality and quantity, generation and destruction, increase and diminution, alteration, and motion. Change occurs when one given state becomes something contrary to it: See Potentiality and actuality.
Therefore, "a thing [can come to be], incidentally, out of that which is not, [and] also all things come to be out of that which is, but is potentiallyand is not actually. Substance is necessarily composed of different elements. The proof for this is that there are things which are different from each other and that all things are composed of elements.
Since elements combine to form composite substances, and because these substances differ from each other, there must be different elements: Although the mathematicians differ on the number of movements, Aristotle considers that the number of celestial spheres would be 47 or Cosmological Argument - History 'First cause arguments' were set forth by Plato and Aristotle in the 4th and 3rd centuries BC.
These arguments maintain that everything that exists or occurs must have had a cause.
So if one would go back in time far enough, one would discover a first cause. This popular argument for the existence of God is most commonly known as the cosmological argument. Aristotle, much like a natural scientist, believed that we could learn about our world and the very essence of things within our world through observation.
The idea that causation is not an infinite process is being introduced as a given. The purpose of Aristotle's cosmological argument, that at least one eternal unmoved mover must exist, is to support everyday change.
Of things that exist, substances are the first.
But if substances can, then all things can perish and yet, time and change cannot. This popular argument for the existence of God is most commonly known as the cosmological argument. Aristotle, much like a natural scientist, believed that we could learn about our world and the very essence of things within our world through observation.
Summary of the Cosmological Argument. So, here’s the cosmological argument again, repaired in such a way to avoid needing to postulate a cause for God. Introduced the first cosmological argument relying on the rejection of an infinite regress.
He stated that there must either be an ultimate cause of things or an infinite chain of causes, however as `something can't come from nothing` there must be a first cause.