Aquinas and god
- This is a preview of the essay.
To view the full text you must login!
Before examining his arguments for the existence of G-d one must first understand why Aquinas chooses to present such views. Aquinas feels that G-d's existence is "self-evident in itself, though not to us," (34). Although the proposal, 'G-d exists,' of "itself is self-evidentbecause we do not know the essence of G-d, the proposition is not self-evident to us" (34). In other words, G-d's existence is indeed self-evident, but for us human-beings, or perhaps just the less learned of the group (as Boethius suggests), it must be confirmed by things that are "more evident to us, though less evident in their nature namely, by effects." It is with this suggestion in mind that Aquinas presents his five proofs that G-d exists.
Aquinas' first argument is that because there are objects in motion there must be some stationary mover that is not in motion, and that primary mover is G-d. In order for something, including humans I suppose, to be reduced "from a state of potentiality into a state of actuality" (35) there must be some primary mover, for "whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another" (35). Since this trail of movement cannot be traced infinitely, the sparking force must indeed be G-d. This logic is ridiculously flawed in a myriad of ways. For one, I disagree with the statement that it is "impossible thatanything should be both moved and mover, or that it should move itself" (35)...