Thomas Aquinas and infinity.?

Question

In one of Thomas Aquinas' works he delivers the "Five Proofs of God". In his first three "proofs" he claims that can not go into infinity. The first being motion - that every motion is done by a mover; the second, efficient causes - a cause and effect; and third, necessary things.
Why did Aquinas think these things could NOT "go on to infinity"??

Answer 1

because you need a First Cause- what Aristotle calls the primum movens the immutable principle that makes the world turn round. nothing could exist without a First Cause. That is, God. If that is obvious, it's very hard to prove that this First Principle is the God of Christians, a personal God. and that is the fundamental problem: what does Aquinas prove finally? Only the necessity of a first cause. And yes, it is necessary for all things to have a cause as long as they exist. If the First Cause will need another cause etc., this would mean that Being is founded on Nothing so everything is nothing.

Answer 2

Becaue infinity can never truly exist. Therefore there must be the First Cause = God.

This is true because if infinity time really existed we could never get to this point right now. Since infinity has no real begining or end you could never make it even close to this point in time. Say the universe was created, in fact, infinity years ago. Well we would still be waiting for infinity for this present moment to come about.

True infinities can never truly exist.

The following is taken from my paper which can be found at the bottom of this answer:

"Example one: Let us suppose that person X had an infinite number of marbles we will call M. Person X wants to give an infinite number of marbles to person Y. One way X could give Y an infinite number of marbles is to give Y all the marbles. So M – M = 0. X could also give Y every odd number marble; both would end up with an infinite number of marbles. So M – M = M. Also X could give Y all the marbles that are numbered 5 and greater. So M – M = 5. In all three cases, I have subtracted the identical number from the identical number, but I have come up with non-identical results. Mathematicians even know this and, as such, are forbidden from doing subtraction and division in transfinite arithmetic. These lead to contradictions. Take this example and put “past events” in place of “marbles” and you get a universe that can’t have an infinite number of past events; it then must have a beginning. Craig, in “Philosophical and Science Pointers”, gave the next example. Imagine a library with an actual infinite number of books. Suppose further that there is an infinite number of red books and an infinite number of black books in the library. Does it really make sense to say that there are as many black books in the library as there are red and black books together? Surely not. Furthermore, I could withdraw all the black books and not change the total holdings in the library. Let us also assume that each book has an actual infinite number of pages. There would be just as many pages in the first book in the library as there are in the entire, infinite collection. This is further proof that an actual infinite cannot exist and thus the universe cannot be infinite but rather have a beginning."

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.listAll&friendID=83781233&startID=141624584&StartPostedDate=2006-07-06%2023:13:00&next=1&page=1&Mytoken=195D38E3-45B2-4A9C-90AB00D57B50B21A59294903

Scroll to the subject heading of "THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT"

Answer 3

Well, you could stop it anywhere you wanted. I believe Thomas just looked at the world around him and said every thing that is in motion must be put in motion by somthing else. Somewhere out there must be a prime mover that set the whole works in motion.

It's basically impossible to prove or disprove the existence of God. But I like the arguements presented by Thomas Aquinas.

Answer 4

That everything considered a thing in itself with its own identity comes to end, ceases or stops existing as such. Every motion of every thing, every effect of every cause and all things necessary if not infinite in its duration for its existence as what it is, has a limited duration for what it is.

His idea or notion for the quality that is 'infinite' is quantity that can not have completed measure for it, but this is only one kind of 'complete', i.e. that which is infinite may be incompletable in another quality for its being and its identity and yet have finite quantity.

"God is *immutable, incapable of change* on the levels of God's essence and character. "

Every thing in natural law IS capable of change, but God would not allow this to become Divine law.

"God is one, without diversification within God's self. The unity of God is such that God's essence is the same as God's existence. In Aquinas's words, "in itself the proposition 'God exists' is necessarily true, for in it subject and predicate are the same." "

If heaven is God, then nothing natural may enter in.


" Analogy
An important element in Aquinas's philosophy is his theory of analogy. Aquinas noted three different forms of descriptive language: univocal, analogical, and equivocal.[23] Univocality is the use of a descriptor in the same sense when applied to two objects. Equivocation is the complete change in meaning of the descriptor and is a logical fallacy. Analogy, Aquinas maintained, occurs when a descriptor changes some but not all of its meaning. Analogy is necessary when talking about God, for some of the aspects of the divine nature are hidden (Deus absconditus) and others revealed (Deus revelatus) to finite human minds. In Aquinas's mind, we can know about God through his creation (general revelation), but only analogically. We can speak of God's goodness only by understanding that goodness as applied to humans is similar to, but not identical with, the goodness of God.[24]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Aquinas

Answer 5

Why does the first cause not need a causer if all other causes do? Is it even necessary for all things to have a cause?