St. Thomas Aquinas' Favorite Argument for the Existence of God (Aquinas 101)
Summary
TLDRIn this philosophical discourse, the focus is on St. Thomas Aquinas's 'Summa Theologiae' and his famous five ways to prove the existence of God. The video suggests that Aquinas's favored argument might be the first way, characterized by its 'manifestior' nature, meaning clearer or more evident. The argument hinges on the concept of a 'first mover that is in no way moved,' which Aquinas posits as the unmoved cause of change. The video explores the premise that change is observable and undeniable, making it the most palpable starting point for Aquinas's argument. It invites viewers to consider whether this is their preferred method among the five and encourages further exploration of Aquinas's philosophy.
Takeaways
- š§ Philosophers, like St. Thomas Aquinas, can have favorite arguments, and Aquinas might have favored the first of his Five Ways for proving God's existence.
- š Aquinas introduces the first way as 'manifestior', suggesting it is clearer and more evident than the other four ways.
- š The first way is structured around the concept of a 'first mover that is in no way moved', which Aquinas equates with 'god'.
- š¤ The argument's clarity is not about certainty but about the ease of understanding the premise that change requires a cause.
- š„ Examples like fire causing wood to burn illustrate how some movers are also moved, but God, as the unmoved mover, is not.
- š¤Ø The premise that something moved must have an unmoved mover is the most contentious part of the argument.
- š The argument's foundation is the undeniable reality of change, which Aquinas believes is self-evident and palpable.
- š” Aquinas asserts that change is not self-caused; it requires an external cause, leading to the conclusion of an unmoved mover.
- š The argument concludes that since there is change, and everything that changes is changed by something else, there must be an unmoved mover, which is 'god'.
- š For further exploration, the video encourages visiting Aquinas101.com for resources and free courses on Aquinas's philosophy.
Q & A
What does St. Thomas Aquinas refer to as 'manifestior' when describing the first of his Five Ways?
-St. Thomas Aquinas refers to the first of his Five Ways as 'manifestior,' which is a Latin word meaning 'clearer,' 'more obvious,' 'more evident,' or 'more palpable,' indicating that he considers it more evident than the other four ways.
What is the core structure of Aquinas's Five Ways?
-The core structure of Aquinas's Five Ways is a syllogistic argument with the form: 'A (blank) is what we call 'a god'; but some being is a (blank); therefore, some being is what we call 'a god.' The first premise provides a working definition of 'god,' and the second premise asserts the existence of something in the world that corresponds to that definition.
How does Aquinas define 'god' in the context of the first way?
-In the context of the first way, Aquinas defines 'god' as 'a first mover that is in no way moved,' meaning that god is something that causes change but is itself not subject to change.
What is the argument of the first way according to Aquinas?
-The argument of the first way is: 'A first mover that is in no way moved is what we call 'a god'; but some being is a first mover that is in no way moved; therefore, some being is what we call 'a god.'
What does Aquinas mean by 'a mover' in his argument?
-Aquinas means by 'a mover' something that causes a change. For example, fire causing wood to burn, light causing a stained-glass window to shine, or a lecture causing an audience to fall asleep.
Why does Aquinas believe there must be an unmoved mover?
-Aquinas believes there must be an unmoved mover because if something is moved by something else, then there must be an initial cause that is not itself moved, which he identifies as 'god.'
What premise in the first way does Aquinas consider to be most evident or palpable?
-Aquinas considers the premise that 'something changes' to be the most evident or palpable, as it is a reality we experience through our senses and is foundational to his argument.
How does Aquinas argue that change requires a cause?
-Aquinas argues that change requires a cause by stating that everything that is changed is changed by something else, and since something is changed, it must be changed by something else.
What is the significance of the first way's starting point in Aquinas's Five Ways?
-The starting point of the first way, which is the reality of change, is significant because it is considered the most palpable and evident premise, being directly observable and experienced, and it serves as the foundation for Aquinas's argument for the existence of god.
What is the final conclusion of the first way in Aquinas's argument for the existence of god?
-The final conclusion of the first way is that since there is change and everything that changes is changed by something else, there must be an unmoved mover, which Aquinas equates with 'god.'
What is the purpose of the website mentioned in the script, Aquinas101.com?
-The purpose of Aquinas101.com is to provide resources such as readings, podcasts, and video courses on St. Thomas Aquinas's philosophy, including his Five Ways, to help people understand and engage with his work.
Outlines
š§ Aquinas' First Way: The Argument for God's Existence
The paragraph discusses St. Thomas Aquinas' famous five ways of proving the existence of God, with a focus on the first way, which Aquinas refers to as 'manifestior' or 'more palpable.' It suggests that Aquinas may have favored this argument due to its clarity and evident nature. The first way is structured around the concept of a 'first mover that is in no way moved,' which Aquinas equates with God. The argument posits that if something is moved, there must be an unmoved mover, and since there is movement, an unmoved moverāGodāmust exist. The paragraph also touches on the philosophical challenge of understanding what 'a first mover that is in no way moved' means and hints at the discussion to be continued in the next video regarding the premises of this argument.
š The Foundation of Aquinas' Argument: Change and Unmoved Mover
This paragraph delves deeper into Aquinas' first way by examining the premise that if something is moved by something else, there must be an unmoved mover. It acknowledges the intuitive nature of this premise, suggesting that it is almost self-evident. The paragraph uses examples such as fire changing wood, light illuminating stained glass, and a lecture causing audience members to fall asleep to illustrate the concept of change. It emphasizes that change is a palpable reality that we experience through our senses, making it a strong foundation for Aquinas' argument. The paragraph concludes by reiterating the logical progression of the argument: since change is evident, and everything that changes is changed by something else, there must be an unmoved mover, which is identified as God.
Mindmap
Keywords
š”Manifestior
š”Five Ways
š”First Mover
š”Unmoved Mover
š”Proof
š”Change
š”Mover
š”Moved
š”Evidence
š”Palpable
Highlights
Philosophers may have favorite arguments, and Aquinas might have favored the first way in his Summa Theologiae.
Aquinas describes the first way as 'manifestior', suggesting it is clearer or more evident than the other four ways.
The first way's argument structure is to define 'god' and assert that something in the world corresponds to this definition.
Aquinas defines 'god' as 'a first mover that is in no way moved', implying a cause of change not subject to change itself.
The argument's premise is that if something is moved by something else, there must be an unmoved mover.
Aquinas argues that change is evident and palpable, making the existence of an unmoved mover a compelling conclusion.
The argument's clarity does not stem from certainty but from the immediacy of the experience of change.
Aquinas believes that understanding change inherently leads to the acceptance of an unmoved mover.
The argument's foundation is the undeniable reality of change, which is both thought and felt.
The first way's starting point is the most palpable of Aquinas's five ways, emphasizing the reality of change.
The argument concludes that since something changes and everything changed is changed by something else, there must be an unmoved mover.
Aquinas's first way is built on the unique foundation that change is a fundamental aspect of our embodied experience.
The argument's structure and premises are designed to lead to the logical conclusion of the existence of a god.
The first way's clarity and evidence are derived from the immediate experience of change, which is more relatable and understandable.
The argument's premise that something is moved by something else is considered self-evident and foundational.
Aquinas's first way is a philosophical argument that bridges the gap between abstract thought and tangible experience.
The argument's conclusion that an unmoved mover exists is based on the observation of change in the world.
Transcripts
Parents may not be allowed to have favorite kids,Ā but philosophers are definitely allowed to haveĀ Ā
favorite arguments. So, whichāif anyāofĀ the famous five ways at the beginning ofĀ Ā
Aquinasās Summa Theologiae was his favoriteĀ argument for proving that thereās a god?
He never really tells us, but I thinkĀ there are some pretty good reasons toĀ Ā
say that his favorite argument forĀ Godās existence was the first way.
One of those reasons has to do with the wayĀ that St. Thomas describes the first way whenĀ Ā
he introduces it. He calls it āmanifestior,ā aĀ Latin word that means āclearer,ā āmore obvious,āĀ Ā
āmore evidentā, orāand this is probablyĀ my favorite translationāāmore palpable.ā
And itās clear from the context that heĀ thinks itās more obvious, more evident,Ā Ā
more palpable than the other fourĀ ways. So at the very least we canĀ Ā
say that the first way holds a special placeĀ in Aquinasās mind, if not also in his heart.
But what does it mean to say that the firstĀ way is the more obvious, or more evident,Ā Ā
or more palpable way of proving that thereās aĀ god? It canāt mean that the first way is moreĀ Ā
certain. After all, the five ways are allĀ supposed to be proofs that thereās a god,Ā Ā
and Aquinas thinks that a proof is an argumentĀ that leaves no room for doubt or error.
So clarity or evidence canāt be about how sure weĀ are that the premises and conclusion are true. ToĀ Ā
see what it is about, we need to take a closerĀ look at the actual argument of the first way.
In the introductory video toĀ this series on the five ways,Ā Ā
we saw that all five ways have the same coreĀ structure: ā__________ (blank) is what we callĀ Ā
āa godā; but some being is a __________ (blank);Ā therefore, some being is what we call āa godā.ā
When we fill in the blank, the first premise givesĀ us a working definition of the word āgodā, whileĀ Ā
the second premise tells us that thereās somethingĀ in the world corresponding to that definition.
What does Aquinas use to fill in the blank ofĀ the argument of the first way? The answer is:Ā Ā
āa first mover that is in no way moved.ā So, theĀ core argument of the first way goes like this:Ā Ā
āa first mover that is in no way moved is whatĀ we call āa godā; but some being is a first moverĀ Ā
that is in no way moved; therefore,Ā some being is what we call āa god.āā
Clear, right? Obvious? Evident? Palpable?Ā Even if youāre steeped in philosophy,Ā Ā
those seem like the bad descriptions of thatĀ argumentābecause itās not at all obvious,Ā Ā
or evident, or palpable what āa first moverĀ that is in no way movedā either means, or is.
But that doesnāt mean we canātĀ make St. Thomasās meaning clear.Ā Ā
What he means by āa moverā isĀ something that causes a change.
So, for example, when fire causesĀ wood to burn, itās a mover.Ā Ā
When light causes a stained-glass window toĀ shine with brilliant colors, itās a mover. AndĀ Ā
if a Dominican causes his audience to fall asleepĀ with his boring philosophy lecture, heās a mover.
Now, some movers are also movedāin other words,Ā Ā
some things that cause change are also caused toĀ change. When the fire causes the wood to burn andĀ Ā
the burning wood warms cold people nearby,Ā the burning wood is both mover and moved.
When light causes the stained-glass windowĀ to shine and the shining stained-glassĀ Ā
window paints the opposite wall with color, theĀ stained-glass window is both mover and moved.
And if a Dominican causes his audience to fallĀ asleep with his boring philosophy lecture,Ā Ā
and falling sleep causes an audienceĀ member to be late for his next class,Ā Ā
falling asleep is both mover and moved.
So, when Aquinas defines āa godā as āa firstĀ mover that is in no way movedā what he meansĀ Ā
is that a god is something that causes changeĀ but is itself in no way caused to change.
Why should we think that there actually is suchĀ a thing? Aquinasās argument is simple. It goesĀ Ā
like this: if something is moved by somethingĀ else, then there must be an unmoved mover;Ā Ā
but something is moved by something else;Ā therefore, there must be an unmoved mover.
Now, if youāre wondering why, exactly, shouldĀ we grant Aquinas the premise that if somethingĀ Ā
is moved by something else, then there hasĀ to be an unmoved mover, youāre worried aboutĀ Ā
exactly the right thing. This is the premiseĀ in the first way that most people object to.
But thatās the topic of the next video.Ā Ā
For now, I want to focus on the other premiseĀ that something is moved by something else.
That premise seems . . . obvious.Ā Maybe even . . . evident. PerhapsĀ Ā
almost . . . palpable. Wood is changed by fire.Ā Ā
Stained glass is changed by light. AudienceĀ members are changed by boring philosophy lectures.
But Aquinas thinks that even somethingĀ as evident as this can still be proved.Ā Ā
The proof goes like this: everything thatĀ is changed is changed by something else;Ā Ā
but something is changed; therefore,Ā something is changed by something else.
And this is where we hit rock-bottom. This isĀ the firm foundation we cannot doubt. For AquinasĀ Ā
thinks that anyone who really understandsĀ what it is to change and to be changed willĀ Ā
understand that something must be changedĀ by something else. Nothing really changesĀ Ā
itself. At most, one part of somethingĀ will change another part of something.
And that brings us to the finalĀ premise: something changes. Here,Ā Ā
at last, we have reached what is manifestiorāwhatĀ is clearer, more obvious, and more evident thanĀ Ā
anything else. Here, at last, we haveĀ reached something genuinely palpable.
The reality of change is something we see withĀ our eyes, hear with our ears, and touch with ourĀ Ā
hands. Itās not that this premise is moreĀ certain than its companion. We can be justĀ Ā
as sure that everything changed is changed byĀ something else as we are that something changes.
But thereās a difference: we can both thinkĀ and feel the truth that something changes.Ā Ā
We can only think the truth that everythingĀ that changes is changed by something else.
As embodied beings, the truth thatĀ something changes is closer to us,Ā Ā
nearer to us, and dearer to us, because itāsĀ part and parcel of our embodied experience.
And thatās the starting point for the firstĀ way, the unique foundation on which itās built:Ā Ā
something changes; but everything thatĀ changes is changed by something else;Ā Ā
so something is changed by something else;
but if something is changed byĀ something else; then there mustĀ Ā
be an unmoved moverāan unchanged cause ofĀ change; so there must be an unmoved mover;Ā Ā
and an unmoved mover is what weĀ call āa godā; so something is a god.
You can decide for yourself whetherĀ thatās your favorite of the five ways.Ā Ā
But thereās one thing thatās not up forĀ discussion: its starting-point is clearly,Ā Ā
obviously, and evidently the most palpable.
For readings, podcasts, and more videos likeĀ this go to Aquinas101.com. While you're there,Ā Ā
be sure to sign up for one of ourĀ free video courses on Aquinas. AndĀ Ā
donāt forget to like and share with yourĀ friends, because it matters what you think!
Browse More Related Video
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)