Analysis Of Saint Thomas Aquinas ' Third Way Essay

Some of the three major arguments for the existence of God are cosmological, ontological, and teleological arguments. Cosmological argument is the reasoning that the being of the universe is powerful proof for the existence of a God who made it. There are two main forms of cosmological argument, the modal and temporal. Modal cosmological argument, also known as the argument from contingency, recommends that because the world may not have existed, we then need some clarification of why it does exist. When there is more than one likelihood, something has to decide which of the possibilities is understood clearly. Therefore the world is contingent, because there has to be a logical reason for its existence. This form of argument also claims that the only type of existence that doesn’t need any clarification is a being that does not failed to exist such as God. Temporal cosmological argument, also known as the Kalam argument, contends that all evidence are that there is a point in life at which the world began to exist, and that this starting must either have been caused or uncaused. The cosmological argument used by Aquinas declares that since nothing originates from nothing. Therefore the world must have been brought into reality by something outside it, which can be called "God".

The arguments made by Aquinas at first seem to be powerful. However, when examining and taking a closer look the arguments don’t seem to be as

     Aquinas’ third way argument states that there has to be something that must exist, which is most likely God. He starts his argument by saying not everything must exist, because things are born and die every single day. By stating this we can jump to the conclusion that if everything need not exist then there would have been a time where there was nothing. But, he goes on, if there was a time when there was nothing, then nothing would exist even today, because something cannot come from nothing. However, our observations tell us that something does exist, therefore there is something that must exist, and Aquinas says that something is God.

After reading Article 1, Aquinas for Armchair Theologians by Timothy M. Renick most can automatically acquire that Thomas Aquinas was a very influential thinker amongst others when explaining his theological views. His religious views may have differed from others during his time, however, it did influence and encourage others on the different topics of God vs. Satan, and why God has not all the answers, and powers when making sure every human being should not face evil. Aquinas believed that Christians needed to view their basic beliefs in another way to make sense of their own faith when questioning all that God did for each individual. The real question to all this, which a lot of people even question today is “Why is their evil in the World?”

St. Francis of Assisi was born in Umbria in the year 1182. He was a child every father hoped for, he was filled with life, a determined and courageous individual. He was gifted with rather good looks, qualities that attracted friends and a gift of leadership. His father was an extremely wealthy merchant in Assisi. But this son, his favourite, was the one who broke Peter Bernardone’s heart. The boy turned on his father, and in a vicious event that eventually resulted into a public scene. St. Francis of Assisi stepped away from his father, his business and left his father in a state of immense emotional suffering.

As discussed in class, modern scientific research provides alternatives to Aquinas’s presumed necessities. An infinite series of causes no longer seems impossible. This research disproves Aquinas 's third premise (P3), and his argument for God as the first cause is consequently unnecessary. Furthermore, the fourth premise still has a logical gap between the first cause and God. Aquinas offers no explanation as to why the first cause must be God or a supernatural being at all. The first cause may just as easily be a spontaneous event, or a first cause may not exist at all in an infinite universal cycle.

Thomas Aquinas’ five ways are his arguments of the five proofs that God exists in some form, these five ways have standard abjections. The arguments are named as follows: argument from motion, arguments from causation, arguments from contingency, argument from gradations of goodness, and the argument of governance. These are Aquinas’ theories of why things change, whatever is changing is being changed by something else.

Therefore, it is more believable that the universe had a beginning and a personal creator. The third of Aquinas' ways is the argument of contingency. The world consists of contingent items- items that have a property are items referred to as 'being.' These items are generated and perish; they have a beginning and an end.

Frederick Copleston was a priest, and historian of philosophy who supported Aquinas’ rejection of infinite regress. Copleston reformulated the argument by concentrating on contingency, which he discussed in depth during a radio debate with Bertrand Russell in 1947. Copleston, like Aquinas, argued that there are things in the universe which are contingent, for example, us – we would not have existed if our parents had not met. All things in the world are similar to this, nothing in the world is self-explanatory, and everything depends on something else for its existence. Therefore, we are forced to search for an external explanation. The explanation must lead us to a cause which is self explanatory, i.e. one which contains within itself, the reason for its own existence – a necessary being. The conclusion must be God. Copleston argues that if we don’t accept the existence of an ‘unmoved mover’, like Aquinas suggested, there is no explanation for the universe at all. Copleston believes the universe is gratuitous without a first cause, because without an explanation, nothing has meaning – “Everything is gratuitous. This garden, this city, and myself; when you suddenly realise it, it makes you feel sick and everything begins to drift… that’s nausea”.

Throughout the course of this essay, I will first define what Aquinas means by incorporating the claim that “an unjust law is no law at all”. This will include defining important terms that will correspond with evaluating Aquinas’ claim.

In The Five Ways, from Summa Theologica, Thomas Aquinas gives the five ways in which an individual can prove that there is a God. In his arguments, Aquinas uses a posteriori and inductive arguments to help prove the existence of God. An a posteriori argument is an argument that uses statements that you cannot know through pure reason like the statement dogs are descendants of wolves. In contrast, an a priori argument is an argument that consist of statements you can know through pure reason like 2 is the square root of 4. Likewise, an inductive argument is an argument that is an attempt to provide premises that make likely the truth of the conclusion, which is used in Aquinas argument. In contrast, a deductive argument is an argument that attempts to provide premises that guarantee the truth of the conclusion.

I will be writing about St. Thomas Aquinas’s “Five ways” and William Paley’s “Teleological argument”. I will be looking into the difference between the two philosophers who both believe in God but have two different approaches on how they can both prove that God does exist. I would like to look deeper into the difference between the two and to see whose theory of Gods existence is more logical with the least arguments. I will be looking at two of Aquinas’s laws two and five,

Question:     Briefly summarize Aquinas’ Fifth Way of proving the existence of God. What counter-argument does Hume cite in answer to this argument from Design? What is John Hick’s answer to Hume’s argument from Evil? Is he right?

5.) Aquinas explains that a person cannot have knowledge of a corporeal thing unless that person has the sense in order to have a sensory experience of it. This experience that is explained by Aquinas is the first of his three grades of cognitive power. He calls his first grade of cognitive power the sense, being the act of a bodily organ in order to understand the individuals and their particulars. The second grade of cognitive power he calls the angelic intellect which exists apart from matter. He explains the angelic intellect as a divine mind in which knows the universal and understands the material things through immaterial things. The final grade of cognitive power is the human intellect and Aquinas explains that

For centuries The Five Ways, drawn from St. Thomas Aquinas’s Summa Theologica have been studied, scrutinized, and at the epicenter of heated debate.