2007-09-28 02:49:28 · 6 answers · asked by Armand P 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
1) Motion
2) Causality
3) Contingency
4) Degrees
5) Design
Aquinas' First Argument, Motion
(1) Objects are in motion.
(2) If something is in motion, then it must be caused to be in motion by something outside of itself.
(3) There can be no infinite chain of movers/movees.
(4) So there is a first, unmoved mover.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
Aquinas' Second Argument, Causality
(1) Some events cause other events.
(2) If an event happens, then it must be caused by something outside of itself.
(3) There can be no infinite cause/effect chains.
(4) So, there is a first, uncaused cause.
(5) Therefore God exists.
Aquinas' Third Argument, Contingency
(1) Contingent things exist.
(2) Each contingent thing has a time at which it fails to exist (contingent things are not omnipresent).
(3) So, if everything were contingent, there would be a time at which nothing exists (call this an empty time).
(4) That empty time would have been in the past.
(5) If the world were empty at one time, it would be empty forever after (a conservation principle).
(6) So, if everything were contingent, nothing would exist now.
(7) But clearly, the world is not empty (premise 1).
(8) So there exists a being who is not contingent.
(9) Hence, God exists.
Aquinas' Fourth Argument, Properties That Come in Degrees
(1) Objects have properties to greater or lesser extents.
(2) If an object has a property to a lesser extent, then there exists some other object that has the property to the maximum possible degree.
(3) So there is an entity that has all properties to the maximum possible degree.
(4) Hence God exists.
Aquinas' Fifth Argument, From Design
(1) Among objects that act for an end, some have minds, whereas others do not.
(2) An object that acts for an end, but does not itself have a mind, must have been created by a being that has a mind.
(3) So there exists a being with a mind who designed all mindless objects that act for an end.
(4) Hence, God exists.
2007-09-28 02:55:33 · answer #1 · answered by Acorn 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
This Site Might Help You.
RE:
What are St. Thomas Aquinas' 5 proofs that God exists?
2015-08-13 09:44:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
1. Motion.
--Basically he states that motion cannot begin on its own, all moving things were caused by some action. Therefore there had to be a first mover, he attributes this to God.
2. Existence.
--Because the universe exists means it must be created.
3. Contingency of creation.
--Because all things must have been created, there must be an initial being that caused the initial creation. That has to be a God that is outside of Physics and the laws of nature and time.
4. Degrees of Perfection
--There are differing degrees of beauty in the universe, therefore there must be a form of perfection that all things are compared too. This perfection is God.
5. Order in the Universe.
-- The universe follows laws that appear to have order, which denotes a designer.
These 5 proofs held strong for hundreds of years, however, as science starts to reveal previously hidden understandings, we are learning that the proofs are actually logically unsound.
The degrees of perfection is based on subjective impressions of beauty.
The proofs actually disprove the existence of a God, because he is a force of movement, that in theory is in existence, and is beautiful and complex. Basically if the 5 proofs are applied to a God figure, they can be used to prove that he doesn't exist, or at the very least was created by something else, who was in turn created by something else and so on. It is a never ending logical fallacy.
2007-09-28 02:53:30 · answer #3 · answered by ɹɐǝɟsuɐs Blessed Cheese Maker 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
First Way:The Argument From Motion
Second Way:Causation Of Existence
Third Way: Contingent and Neccessary Objects
Fourth Way: The Agrument From Degrees And Perfection
Fifth Way: The Agrument From Intelligent Design
2007-09-28 02:57:42 · answer #4 · answered by Sentinel 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
5 Proofs Of God
2016-11-14 23:24:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Aquinas stole this composition from the Arab Muslim scholar Alfarabius (Al-Farabi)...so don't you accredit it to Aquinas.
2007-09-28 02:52:45 · answer #6 · answered by Ash'ari Maturidi 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
None of them is actual proof; they're all logical fallacies.
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=185919
2007-09-28 02:55:55 · answer #7 · answered by Dreamstuff Entity 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋