This argument about Aquinas’s cosmological argument for the existence of god has been popular and his using of logic on his argument is much like other scientists. Aquinas believed that we can learn about our world and the important qualities of certain things in our world through making a statement or just examining. He would do the same in which to examine the physical world around him in order to gain his knowledge or understanding of the world. The word cosmological is used to describe the reflection of sense data and instance of watching. I found that Aquinas used five arguments about using ideas like, the first mover, first cause, sustainer, the cause of excellence, and the source of harmony.
He gives us an extreme support and a
…show more content…
I can support his other arguments by saying that if there is not a first cause then there cannot be an intermediate and final cause. However, the absence of any such cause can clearly does not resemble to our judgmental observation and from that, we can say that the result must have a stable cause. So analyzing an extra further on Aquina argument, we can understand that there must be a cause for everything. For instance, the existence of turning a phone on. This phone cannot cause it’s appearance to come out of nowhere. This phone cannot cause it to appear without having this phone a creator by someone. In result, there is a phone creator who created the phone and cause it existence, but the phone creator and the phone did not cause their existence. So we can say that something caused their existence and this can build up to assume that everything in existence has a first cause which finalizes to the start of all causes and all things.
After a analyze of everything in Aquinas argument about the existence of God, the understanding of all causes made sense and supported with details that I put together and give it a better understanding. As I was explaining another way in which I gave my truthful about what Aquinas was trying to say for the existence god instead of an example throughout a philosophical way. The reason why I gave a different perspective of the existence of God is that I can give a better understanding on what Aquinas is trying to say. Also in that
St. Thomas Aquinas’s first cosmological argument, the prime mover, defines things in the world as being either in a state of potentiality or in a state of actuality. Those things that are in potentiality are things that have the capability of being reduced to another form. Such as a boy is potentially a man, or tree is potentially a house. Things that are in a state of actuality are things that are currently reaching their potential; such as that boy becoming a man, or that tree becoming that house. Aquinas observed that all things in a state of actuality had to have been put into that state by something that was already in actuality. In thinking about this he concluded that there would have to be an infinite regress of actual things making potential things actual. He concluded that this would be impossible because given that, there would be no first mover. He instead, postulated that there must be a first mover. A being that never had potential but only has existed in a state of infinite actuality. That what we call 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?”
Thomas Aquinas's Summa Theologica represents one of the most famous attempts to prove God's existence. Aquinas wrote at a time in which people began to develop skepticism concerning the existence of God. In this regard, it is instructive to position Aquinas
Thomas Aquinas’s cosmological argument is a posteriori argument that Aquinas uses to prove the existence of God. Aquinas argues that, “Nothing can move itself, so whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this causal loop cannot go on to infinity, so if every object in motion had a mover, there must be a first mover which is the unmoved mover, called God.” (Aquinas, Question 2, Article 3). I do agree with Aquinas’s cosmological argument in proving the existence of God with several reasons.
The Strengths and Weaknesses of the Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God The cosmological argument seeks to prove the existence of God by looking at the universe. It is an A posteriori proof based on experience and the observation of the world not logic so the outcome is probable or possible not definite. The argument is in three forms; motion, causation and being. These are also the first three ways in the five ways presented by Aquinas through which he believed the existence of God could be shown.
In an attempt to justify the existence of God, Christian Philosopher, St Thomas Aquinas, has developed an argument which derived from his observation of the physical world. He evidently observed that everything in the universe is moving and that which is moving is certain that it must have been moved by something else which has also been moved by something else. However, he realizes that by tracing back who has caused the very first movement, he believes that there must
Aquinas’ second argument is about efficient cause. Aquinas states “We do not, and cannot, find that something is
Many philosophers have posed the question: How can I prove that God exists? Thomas Aquinas attempted to prove the existence of God in a rational way through his Cosmological argument. Aquinas argued that every event as we observe it has a cause and a casual chain cannot be infinite. Therefore, a first cause is necessary and this cause is God. Aquinas’ argument is unsuccessful because it assumes that God is a necessary being, fails to prove that the world is not an infinite chain of events, and undermines the basis of his argument by saying that God is infinite.
Aquinas arguments are strong cases in the existence of God. His work helped me appreciate and made me want to explore his philosophical skill in exploring Gods nature, and also defending Christian teaching. Being Christian is one of the main reasons why I picked Aquinas arguments, also because the work he provided for us is true in my eyes. I’m going to defend and state some reasons in why I believe him and his role should be played in Religion today. “Motion” an argument he tries to prove in God existence.
In the Cosmological argument, we are presented with a very sound argument. In this argument, Aquinas is answering the question of why there has to be a first cause and why the first cause is God. He tells us that everything that exist in this universe needs an explanation for why it exist. Secondly, Aquinas tells us that all the objects that exist now were caused to exist by other objects before them and this cycle goes on. Thirdly, he tells us the universe couldn’t possibly be something that goes on infinitely.
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.
Critique of Aquinas's Cosmological Argument Aquinas's 3rd way suggests that the world consists of contingent beings. As all contingent beings have a cause, namely another contingent being, there must have been a time when nothing existed, (unless contingent beings exist as a brute fact). Therefore, contingent beings could not have come into existence unless there is a necessary being which is non- contingent that caused them. Aquinas named this being God. The problem with Aquinas's view is that as physicians have suggested matter is eternal and therefore a necessary being is not required to cause contingent beings.
An important argument to try and prove the existence of God is the Cosmological Argument brought on by observations of the physical universe, made by Saint Thomas Aquinas, a thirteenth century Christian philosopher. The cosmological argument is a result from the study of the cosmos; Aquinas borrows ideas from Aristotle to make this systematically organized argument.
Aquinas' second proof is similar to his first in that it relates to cause and effect. St. Thomas reasoned that in a world of order there is an order to all cause and effect. And , since there is a cause for the existence of all things there must be a cause that caused all things and had no cause itself. He points out that nothing in creation existed prior to itself and the causality cannot be traced back infinitely. If the efficient or first cause did not exist then nothing would exist. That first or efficient cause is God.
Here Aquinas argues that everything that happens is the cause of something, but nothing can cause itself. If we trace back a cause all the way back to the beginning of the world, it could not have caused itself. Therefore, God must have been the first cause. Aquinas’ third proof is the Argument from Contingency. We see that everything here on earth is finite. People die, empires fall. All things must come to an end. That means things had to have a beginning where nothing was in existence yet. How did things come into existence? God. Aquinas’s 4th argument is the Argument of Degrees. Here we judge things to be a certain degree of good or bad. But what are we comparing that to? If they have a certain degree of good and bad, then what is the greatest degree of good? And that must be God. Aquinas’s final argument is his Argument from Design. Perhaps one of his strongest arguments Aquinas says that there must be an intelligent designer behind everything. Random objects don’t have any brains to act the way they do. But they are directed in the way they act by God.