5 evidence for the existence of God Thomas Aquinas briefly with examples. Criticism and refutation of the five proofs of the existence of God by Thomas Aquinas

2024 Author: Miguel Ramacey | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 06:11

Whether or not God exists has been debated for hundreds of years. Believers diligently argue their views, while skeptics just as diligently refute them. In this article, we will touch on 5 proofs of the existence of God by Thomas Aquinas. We will also look at rebuttal examples so that we can clearly understand the strengths and weaknesses of this system.

On the proofs of Saint Thomas

St. Thomas Aquinas is a famous Catholic theologian, whose writings have acquired the status of the official creed of the Western Church, led by the papacy in Rome. The mentioned 5 proofs of the existence of God by Thomas Aquinas were presented by him in a fundamental work called "The Sum of Theology". In it, the author, among other things, argued that the existence of the Creator can be proved in two ways, namely, with the help of a cause and with the help ofconsequences. In other words, we are talking about arguments from cause to effect and from effect to cause. Thomas Aquinas' five proofs for the existence of God are based on the second approach. Their general logic is as follows: since there are obvious consequences of the cause, the cause itself also has a place to be. Thomas claims that the existence of God is not obvious to people. Therefore, it is possible to prove its existence if we consider the Creator as the root cause of the consequences that are obvious to us. This statement is taken as a basis by St. Thomas Aquinas. 5 proofs of the existence of God, briefly described, of course, will not allow to fully appreciate the depth of thought of this outstanding theologian, but they will help to get a general impression of the problem raised.

Proof one. Off the move

Nowadays this Thomas argument is usually called kinetic. It is based on the assertion that everything that exists is in motion. But by itself, nothing can move. So, for example, a cart moves a horse, a car makes a motor move, and a sailboat sets air in motion. Molecules, atoms and everything that is in the world move, and all of it receives an impulse to act from the outside, from something else. And then, in turn, from the third and so on. The result is an endless chain of cause and effect. But there can be no infinite chain, as Foma claims, otherwise there would be no first engine. And if there is no first, then there is no second, and then the movement would not exist at all. Accordingly, there must be a primary source that is the causemovement of everything else, but which itself is not subject to the influence of third forces. This prime mover is God.

Proof the second. From the producing cause

This argument is based on the assertion that every thing, every phenomenon is the effect of some producing cause. A tree, according to him, grows from a seed, a living being is born from a mother, glass is obtained from sand, and so on. At the same time, no thing in the world can be the cause of itself, since in this case it would be necessary to admit that it existed before its appearance. In other words, an egg cannot tear itself down, and a house cannot build itself. And as a result, a chain of endless causes and effects is again obtained, which should rest against the primary source. Its existence is not the effect of a prior cause, but it is itself the cause of everything else. And if it were not for it at all, then there would be no process of producing causes and effects. This source is God.

Proof three. From necessity and chance

Like all 5 proofs of the existence of God by Thomas Aquinas, this argument is based on the law of cause and effect. However, he is very idiosyncratic. Thomas argues that there are random things in the world that may or may not exist. Once upon a time they really were, but before that they were not. And it is impossible to imagine, according to Thomas, that they arose by themselves. Accordingly, shouldbe the cause of their occurrence. Ultimately, this leads us to postulate the existence of an entity that would be necessary in itself and would not have external reasons for being a necessity for all others. Thomas defines this essence with the concept of "God".

Proof 4. From the degree of perfection

Thomas Aquinas based 5 proofs of the existence of God on Aristotelian formal logic. One of them says that in all things that are in the world, various degrees of perfection are manifested. This refers to the concepts of goodness, beauty, nobility and form of existence. However, the degrees of perfection are known to us only in comparison with something else. In other words, they are relative. Further, Aquinas concludes that against the background of all relative things, a certain phenomenon should stand out, endowed with absolute perfection. For example, you can compare things by beauty either relative to the worst or relative to the best things. But there must be an absolute criterion, above which nothing can be. This most perfect phenomenon in all respects is what is called God.

Proof fifth. From leading the world

Like all 5 of Thomas Aquinas' proofs for the existence of God, this starts from the idea of a first cause. In this case, it is considered in the aspect of meaningfulness and expediency that the world and the living creatures inhabiting it have. The latter strive for something better, that is, consciously or unconsciously pursue somegoal. For example, procreation, a comfortable existence, and so on. Therefore, Thomas concludes that there must be a higher being who intelligently controls the world and creates his own goals for everything. Of course, this being can only be God.

5 proofs of the existence of God by Thomas Aquinas and their criticism

Even a superficial analysis of the above arguments shows that they are all aspects of the same logical chain. Thomas Aquinas' 5 proofs for the existence of God focus mainly not on a higher entity, but on the material world. The latter appears in them as a consequence or a complex of various consequences of a single root cause, which itself has no causes in anything, but which must necessarily exist. Thomas calls her God, but, nevertheless, this does not bring us closer to understanding what God is.

Consequently, these arguments can in no way prove the existence of a confessional Lord, Christian or otherwise. Based on them, it cannot be argued that there is exactly the Creator who is worshiped by the followers of the Abrahamic religions. In addition, if we analyze the five proofs of the existence of God by Thomas Aquinas, it becomes clear that the postulation of the Creator of the world is rather not a necessary logical conclusion, but a hypothetical assumption. This is evident from the fact that the nature of the root cause is not disclosed in them, and it may turn out to be completely different from what we imagine it to be. These arguments are not convincingmetaphysical picture of the world offered by Thomas Aquinas.

5 proofs of the existence of God briefly highlight the problem of our ignorance of the fundamental principles of the universe. Theoretically, it may turn out that our world is the creation of some kind of super-civilization, or a consequence of the action of yet undiscovered laws of the universe, or some kind of emanation, and so on. In other words, any fantastic concept and theory that has nothing to do with God, as we imagine him, can be offered for the role of the root cause. Thus, God as the Creator of the world and the root cause of everything is only one of the possible answers to the questions formulated by Thomas. Accordingly, these arguments cannot serve as evidence in the truest sense of the word.

Another counter-argument concerns the fourth proof, which postulates a certain gradation of the perfection of phenomena in the world. But, if you think about it, what can serve as a guarantee that such concepts as beauty, goodness, nobility, and so on, are quite objective characteristics for themselves, and not subjective categories of the human mind, that is, a product of mental differentiation? Indeed, what measures beauty and how, and what is the nature of the aesthetic feeling? And is it possible to think of God in terms of human concepts of good and evil, which, as history shows, are constantly undergoing changes? Ethical values change - aesthetic values also change. What yesterday seemed to be the standard of beauty, today is an example of mediocrity. What was good two hundred years ago is today qualified as extremism and a crime against humanity. Inscribing God into this framework of human concepts makes him just another mental category, and just as relative. Therefore, the identification of the Almighty with absolute good or absolute good is by no means evidence of his objective existence.

Moreover, such a God will certainly be beyond evil, dirt and ugliness. That is, it cannot be absolute evil, for example. We will have to postulate the presence of several gods, personifying various mutually exclusive phenomena in their absolute degree. None of them, accordingly, due to its limitations, can be a real God, who, as an absolute, must contain everything, and therefore be one. Simply put, no concepts and categories of the human mind are inapplicable to God, and therefore cannot serve as proof of his existence.