Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD - AQUINAS - Coggle Diagram
COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD - AQUINAS
Inductive argument
Inductive arguments are probabilistic (the truth of its conclusions cannot be guaranteed by the truth of its premises)
Does everything have a cause?
'We do not have knowledge of a thing until we have grasped its why, that is so say, its cause'- Aristotle
We cannot claim to understand something until we know its cause e.g. the universe
Empirical argument
It is all about observation/working with experience and making conclusions based on this observation
Aquinas' Five Ways for proving the existence of God - Book = Summa Theologica
1 -
Motion
(unmoved mover)
2 -
Causation
(uncaused cause)
3 -
Necessity
4 - Perfection
5 - Design
Third Way - Contingency + Necessity
A posteriori
Inductive
Based in observation (empiricism)
Way 3 is the observation that all things we see in the universe are contingent
This means they are moved, changed and caused
They do not need to exist but they do
This applies to galaxies, stars, planets, people and trees
From the observation (all things are contingent), Aquinas concluded that SOMETHING must exist necessarily
It must be outside the observable universe because there is nothing in what we observe that can explain why contingent things exist
He therefore deduces that this external reason must be necessary
Aquinas - Summa Theologica
'The third way is taken from possibility and necessity'
It is possible to imagine yourself not existing - e.g. if your parents hadn't of met at a certain place/time then falling in love
The point here, is that you can imagine these things to exist + not to exist
E.g. a tree - it didn't have to grow there but it did
These things have been created + they can change overtime
E.g. decay, age, rot
This shows it is a contingent being because it is subject to change
He does say that there was a time where everything didn't exist
If there was a time where there was nothing, how did there end up being something?
'Nothing can come from nothing'
- Aristotle said, Aquinas then agreed
If there was a point where there was originally nothing, surely there would still be nothing? - Aquinas' views this as absurd
There must therefore be something that necessarily being that has not been given its existence, but instead is the cause of everything else/this uncaused cause/mover
'all me speak of as God' = this necessary being must be God
Aquinas Third Way
P1 -
Everything in the natural world is contingent - everything can exist, or not exist
P2 -
If everything is contingent, then at some time there was nothing, because there must've been a time before anything had begun to exist
P3 -
If there was once nothing, then nothing could've come from nothing
C -
Therefore, something must exist necessarily, otherwise nothing would now exist, which is false
P4 -
Everything necessary must either be caused or uncaused
P5 -
But the series of necessary beings cannot be infinite or there would be no explanation of that series
C2 -
Therefore, there must be some uncaused being which exists of its own necessity
C3 -
By this we all understand God