Aquinas & the Cosmological Arguments: Crash Course Philosophy #10

Summary

This Crash Course Philosophy episode delves into Thomas Aquinas' cosmological arguments for God's existence, exploring the Argument from Motion, Causation, Contingency, and Degrees. It discusses the philosophical debate surrounding these arguments, including criticisms that they do not prove the existence of a personal God, the possibility of infinite regress, and the self-defeating nature of the arguments. The video encourages viewers to engage in philosophical dialogue, questioning and refining Aquinas' reasoning.

Takeaways

• 📜 The script discusses the ontological argument for God's existence by Anselm of Canterbury and the subsequent critique by Thomas Aquinas.
• 🤔 Thomas Aquinas, despite believing in God, sought empirical evidence and created five arguments to prove God's existence, known as the cosmological arguments.
• 🔄 Aquinas' first argument, the Argument from Motion, posits that all motion must have been initiated by a 'first mover,' identified as God, to avoid an infinite regress.
• 🔗 The Argument from Causation, the second of Aquinas' arguments, also avoids infinite regress by asserting the necessity of a 'first causer,' which is God.
• 🌐 The Argument from Contingency is the third argument, suggesting that there must be at least one necessary being to prevent an infinite regress of contingent beings that could have not existed.
• ⚖️ The fourth argument, the Argument from Degrees, relies on the concept that there must be a perfect being, God, to serve as the standard for all other degrees of perfection.
• 🤨 Philosophers have criticized Aquinas' arguments for not proving the existence of a personal, loving God as commonly worshipped, but rather an abstract entity.
• 👥 The arguments do not exclude the possibility of polytheism or the existence of a sentient God, which raises questions about their validity in proving the specific God of theists.
• 🔍 The critique also questions Aquinas' assumption against infinite regress, suggesting that it may not necessarily be logically impossible.
• ❌ A significant objection is that Aquinas' arguments could be self-defeating, as they imply that God should also require a cause or mover, contradicting the conclusion that God is uncaused and unmoved.
• 💬 The script encourages viewers to engage in philosophical discourse, offering counterarguments or refining Aquinas' arguments to better support the conclusion of God's existence.

Q & A

What is the ontological argument mentioned in the script?

The ontological argument is a philosophical argument for the existence of God, originally proposed by Anselm of Canterbury in the 11th century, which claims to provide deductive proof of God's existence.

Why did Thomas Aquinas not accept Anselm's ontological argument?

Thomas Aquinas did not accept Anselm's ontological argument because, as a philosopher, he believed in the importance of having evidence for one's beliefs and felt that Anselm's argument did not sufficiently prove the existence of God.

What are the cosmological arguments of Thomas Aquinas?

Thomas Aquinas' cosmological arguments are a set of four philosophical arguments that aim to prove the existence of God through necessary facts about the universe, including the Argument from Motion, the Argument from Causation, the Argument from Contingency, and the Argument from Degrees of Perfection.

What is the Argument from Motion, and how does it attempt to prove God's existence?

The Argument from Motion is the first of Aquinas' cosmological arguments. It posits that since everything in motion is set into motion by something else, there must be a first mover, which is unmoved itself, and this first mover is identified as God.

How does the Argument from Causation avoid the problem of an infinite regress?

The Argument from Causation asserts that everything caused must have a cause, but there cannot be an infinite regress of causes. Therefore, there must be a first cause, which is uncaused, and this first cause is identified as God.

What is the Argument from Contingency, and what does it claim about the existence of God?

The Argument from Contingency is the third of Aquinas' cosmological arguments. It distinguishes between necessary and contingent beings. It argues that there must be at least one necessary being to prevent an infinite regress of contingency, and this necessary being is God.

What is the Argument from Degrees of Perfection, and how does it relate to the concept of God?

The Argument from Degrees of Perfection, or the fourth cosmological argument, suggests that since properties come in degrees, there must be something perfect against which everything else is measured. This perfect being is identified as God.

What are some of the criticisms of Aquinas' cosmological arguments?

Critics argue that Aquinas' arguments do not establish the existence of a specific god, do not rule out polytheism, and do not prove the existence of a sentient God. Additionally, some philosophers challenge the assumption that an infinite regress is impossible and the self-defeating nature of the arguments, which could imply that God should also be subject to the same rules as everything else.

What is the significance of the concept of 'infinite regress' in Aquinas' arguments?

The concept of 'infinite regress' is significant in Aquinas' arguments because it is used to argue against the idea that there could be an endless chain of causes or movers without a starting point. Aquinas believed that an infinite regress was logically impossible and thus necessitated the existence of a first cause or mover, identified as God.

How does the script suggest engaging with Aquinas' arguments in a philosophical manner?

The script suggests engaging with Aquinas' arguments by critically evaluating them, offering counterarguments, and participating in the ongoing conversation about the existence of God. It emphasizes the importance of providing reasons and evidence for one's beliefs and understanding that one can accept a conclusion while rejecting an argument.

What is the teleological argument that will be discussed in the next episode of Crash Course Philosophy?

The teleological argument, which will be discussed in the next episode, is another philosophical argument for the existence of God, often referred to as the 'argument from design.' It suggests that the complexity and order of the universe imply a purpose or design, which in turn suggests the existence of a designer, identified as God.