РефератыИностранный языкStSt Thomas Aquinas Essay Research Paper What

St Thomas Aquinas Essay Research Paper What

St. Thomas Aquinas Essay, Research Paper


What is the Best Way to Prove God? A Comparison of St.


Thomas Aquinas St. Thomas Aquinas is one of the greatest


theologians that has ever been. He recognized that there


were some people who doubted the existence of God because,


to them, logic did not allow for or explain God’s existence. Being a


devout Christian, he naturally believed in God, but he wanted to


prove God’s existence to those who could not accept things on


faith alone. As a result, we have five proofs of the existence of


God by St. Thomas Aquinas, all of which are based on logic and


observation of nature. One of his proofs is based on the idea of


a first mover and another is based on the idea that intelligence


is necessary to direct non-intelligent objects. I believe that


this fifth argument is better that the first. St. Thomas


Aquinas’ first argument tries to prove that there must be a


first mover. He calls this first mover God. He proves this by


saying that whatever is in motion must have been put in motion


by something else. He then defines one type of motion as the


reduction of something from potentiality to actuality, and says


that nothing can make this movement except by something that


is already in actuality in the same respect as the first object is


in potentiality. He goes on to say that no thing can be both


actual and potential in respect to the same aspect and, thus,


that nothing can be both moved and mover. In this, he means


that nothing can move itself. Therefore, if something is in


motion, it must have been put in motion by something else, which


must have been put in motion by yet another thing, and so on.


However, this cannot go on to infinity, as St. Thomas Aquinas


explains, because there would never have been a fist mover and,


thus, no subsequent movers. This leads to the conclusion that


there is a first mover, and this first mover is what is called


God. His fifth argument is actually much more simple. Just by


observing the world, we see the non-intelligent things always


act toward an end. (It is this observation of the universe that


is the basis for the sciences, especially the science of physics.)


We also see that non-intelligent things cannot move toward


their end unless directed by an intelligent being. As an example,


St. Thomas Aquinas uses an arrow. An arrow will not achieve its


purpose (that of reaching its mark) unless directed to do so by


an archer. Obviously, humans are the intelligent beings that


direct the small objects of our world, but there must be a


greater intelligence that directs the larger bodies of the


universe, such as the stars and the planets, since we obviously


have no control over them. This higher intelligence is what we


call God. These two arguments approach the problem of proving


God’s existence in two completely different ways. One goes the


route of saying there must be something that started


everything, and the other says there must be something that


controls the things that are here, even if “it” did not create


them. Both of these arguments seem, at first, to be good and


valid in their separ

ate approaches. However, the first on does


have one major flaw as I see it. St. Thomas Aquinas says that


the line of movers cannot go on to infinity, which common sense


would tell you to be true. He thus establishes the arbitrary


endpoint of God. The problem I see is that this argument could


always be tested to be false by asking the question, “What


Moved God?” St. Thomas Aquinas would probably answer that


nothing mover God because God has always existed. I personally


believe this to be true, but, to prove his first argument, St.


Thomas Aquinas must accompany it by another argument that


proves God has existed forever. Then, God would not need to


have been moved since He would have always been. This would


make for a kind of circular flaw in logic or paradox, in that he


could not prove God existed until he proved God has existed


forever, and he obviously cannot prove that God has existed


forever until he proves that God exists at all. Because of this, I


do not believe God can be proved by means of St. Thomas


Aquinas’ first argument or by any similar means. In St. Thomas


Aquinas’ fifth argument, however, I do not see any flaws in


logic and I do not thing it needs to rely on any other arguments


to be valid. Just by observing the universe, we have found that


it operates according to certain rules or laws. However, it


seems very unlikely that these laws just appeared out of


nowhere, that they emerged with the creation of the universe.


According to currently accepted scientific theory, the universe


started with the big bang. This theory also states that, if


anything existed before the big bang, we cannot predict what it


was like because physical laws did not govern the universe at


that time. So, it seems, physical laws must have just appeared as


a result of the big bang. Science, which traditionally tries to


explain the universe without the “crutch” or involvement of


God, cannot and could never explain why these laws exist in the


first place. The only explanation I can see is that God has put


them there to govern the universe. This is the same argument


St. Thomas Aquinas uses, and it seems to be completely self-


supporting and free of any flaws in logic. For these reasons, I


believe this argument to be better than the first argument.


Proving the existence of God is a worthwhile task. If someone


did come up with a complete, foolproof argument for the


existence of God, the people of the world would have no choice


but to believe in His existence. However, even though St.


Thomas Aquinas makes a worthy effort, I believe that such a


task is not possible through logic and reasoning alone. There is


an element of faith that must be present for people to believe,


and if that element is not there, no matter how foolproof an


argument seems to be, there will always be those who do not


believe. In his fifth argument, St/ Thomas Aquinas makes as


close to foolproof argument that I believe anyone could make,


and, for me, it does prove God’s existence. However, if that


element of faith is not there, I do not think you can completely


prove God’s existence to everyone.

Сохранить в соц. сетях:
Обсуждение:
comments powered by Disqus

Название реферата: St Thomas Aquinas Essay Research Paper What

Слов:1210
Символов:7604
Размер:14.85 Кб.