St. Thomas Aquinas' Favorite Argument for the Existence of God (Aquinas 101)

Summary

In 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

• 🧐 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.
• 📜 Aquinas introduces the first way as 'manifestior', suggesting it is clearer and more evident than the other four ways.
• 🔍 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's clarity is not about certainty but about the ease of understanding the premise that change requires a cause.
• 🔥 Examples like fire causing wood to burn illustrate how some movers are also moved, but God, as the unmoved mover, is not.
• 🤨 The premise that something moved must have an unmoved mover is the most contentious part of the argument.
• 🌟 The argument's foundation is the undeniable reality of change, which Aquinas believes is self-evident and palpable.
• 💡 Aquinas asserts that change is not self-caused; it requires an external cause, leading to the conclusion of an unmoved mover.
• 📝 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'.
• 📖 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

00:00

🧠 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 mover—God—must 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.

05:03

🔍 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.

Keywords

💡Manifestior

The term 'manifestior' is a Latin word meaning 'clearer', 'more obvious', 'more evident', or 'more palpable'. In the context of the video, it is used to describe St. Thomas Aquinas's view of the first way of proving God's existence as being more evident than the other four ways. The script suggests that Aquinas considers the first way to be the most palpable and evident argument, setting it apart in terms of its clarity and intuitiveness.

💡Five Ways

The 'Five Ways' refer to the five arguments presented by St. Thomas Aquinas in the beginning of his 'Summa Theologiae' to demonstrate the existence of God. The video focuses on the first of these ways, suggesting it might be Aquinas's favorite due to its clarity and evidential nature. The Five Ways are central to the video's exploration of philosophical arguments for God's existence.

💡First Mover

A 'first mover' in Aquinas's philosophy is an entity that causes change without itself being moved. The video explains that Aquinas defines 'God' as a 'first mover that is in no way moved', meaning that God is the ultimate cause of all change without being subject to change. This concept is central to the first way of proving God's existence and is used to argue for a necessary being that is not dependent on anything else for its motion.

💡Unmoved Mover

The 'unmoved mover' is a concept in the first way of Aquinas's argument, which posits that if something is moved, there must be a cause that is not itself moved. The video argues that this unmoved mover is what Aquinas identifies as 'God'. The concept is pivotal in understanding the argument's structure and its conclusion that there must be a being that is the ultimate cause of all motion without being moved itself.

💡Proof

In the context of the video, a 'proof' is an argument that leaves no room for doubt or error, aiming to establish a conclusion with certainty. Aquinas's Five Ways are presented as proofs for the existence of God, with the first way being particularly emphasized for its evidential strength. The video discusses the nature of proof in relation to the certainty and clarity of the argument's premises and conclusion.

💡Change

The concept of 'change' is fundamental to the first way of Aquinas's argument. The video explains that change is something we experience directly and is used to argue for the necessity of an unmoved mover. Aquinas posits that everything that changes is changed by something else, leading to the conclusion that there must be an unmoved mover at the origin of all change.

💡Mover

A 'mover' in Aquinas's philosophy is anything that causes a change. The video uses examples such as fire causing wood to burn, light illuminating a stained-glass window, or a lecture causing an audience to fall asleep to illustrate movers. The concept is essential in understanding the argument for an unmoved mover, as it distinguishes between things that cause change and those that are caused to change.

💡Moved

To be 'moved' in this context means to undergo change as a result of the action of a mover. The video discusses how some things that are movers are also moved, such as the wood being warmed by the fire. This concept is crucial for understanding the argument that there must be a first mover that is not itself moved, which is identified as God.

💡Evidence

The term 'evidence' in the video refers to the clarity and obviousness of the argument's premises and conclusion. It is used to describe why Aquinas might have considered the first way as more evident than the others. The video suggests that the first way's starting point, the reality of change, is something that is evident and palpable to our senses, making it a strong foundation for the argument.

💡Palpable

The word 'palpable' is used to describe the tangibility and immediate experience of the reality of change. The video argues that the fact that something changes is palpable to us as embodied beings, making it a more intuitive and clear starting point for the argument. This term is used to emphasize the experiential aspect of the first way's premise, contrasting it with the more abstract nature of other premises.

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,  but philosophers are definitely allowed to have  

favorite arguments. So, which—if any—of  the famous five ways at the beginning of  

Aquinas’s Summa Theologiae was his favorite  argument for proving that there’s a god?

He never really tells us, but I think  there are some pretty good reasons to  

say that his favorite argument for  God’s existence was the first way.

One of those reasons has to do with the way  that St. Thomas describes the first way when  

he introduces it. He calls it “manifestior,” a  Latin word that means “clearer,” “more obvious,”  

“more evident”, or—and this is probably  my favorite translation—“more palpable.”

And it’s clear from the context that he  thinks it’s more obvious, more evident,  

more palpable than the other four  ways. So at the very least we can  

say that the first way holds a special place  in Aquinas’s mind, if not also in his heart.

But what does it mean to say that the first  way is the more obvious, or more evident,  

or more palpable way of proving that there’s a  god? It can’t mean that the first way is more  

certain. After all, the five ways are all  supposed to be proofs that there’s a god,  

and Aquinas thinks that a proof is an argument  that leaves no room for doubt or error.

So clarity or evidence can’t be about how sure we  are that the premises and conclusion are true. To  

see what it is about, we need to take a closer  look at the actual argument of the first way.

In the introductory video to  this series on the five ways,  

we saw that all five ways have the same core  structure: “__________ (blank) is what we call  

‘a god’; but some being is a __________ (blank);  therefore, some being is what we call ‘a god’.”

When we fill in the blank, the first premise gives  us a working definition of the word ‘god’, while  

the second premise tells us that there’s something  in the world corresponding to that definition.

What does Aquinas use to fill in the blank of  the argument of the first way? The answer is:  

“a first mover that is in no way moved.” So, the  core argument of the first way goes like this:  

“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.’”

Clear, right? Obvious? Evident? Palpable?  Even if you’re steeped in philosophy,  

those seem like the bad descriptions of that  argument—because it’s not at all obvious,  

or evident, or palpable what “a first mover  that is in no way moved” either means, or is.

But that doesn’t mean we can’t  make St. Thomas’s meaning clear.  

What he means by “a mover” is  something that causes a change.

So, for example, when fire causes  wood to burn, it’s a mover.  

When light causes a stained-glass window to  shine with brilliant colors, it’s a mover. And  

if a Dominican causes his audience to fall asleep  with his boring philosophy lecture, he’s a mover.

Now, some movers are also moved—in other words,  

some things that cause change are also caused to  change. When the fire causes the wood to burn and  

the burning wood warms cold people nearby,  the burning wood is both mover and moved.

When light causes the stained-glass window  to shine and the shining stained-glass  

window paints the opposite wall with color, the  stained-glass window is both mover and moved.

And if a Dominican causes his audience to fall  asleep with his boring philosophy lecture,  

and falling sleep causes an audience  member to be late for his next class,  

falling asleep is both mover and moved.

So, when Aquinas defines ‘a god’ as “a first  mover that is in no way moved” what he means  

is that a god is something that causes change  but is itself in no way caused to change.

Why should we think that there actually is such  a thing? Aquinas’s argument is simple. It goes  

like this: if something is moved by something  else, then there must be an unmoved mover;  

but something is moved by something else;  therefore, there must be an unmoved mover.

Now, if you’re wondering why, exactly, should  we grant Aquinas the premise that if something  

is moved by something else, then there has  to be an unmoved mover, you’re worried about  

exactly the right thing. This is the premise  in the first way that most people object to.

But that’s the topic of the next video.  

For now, I want to focus on the other premise  that something is moved by something else.

That premise seems . . . obvious.  Maybe even . . . evident. Perhaps  

almost . . . palpable. Wood is changed by fire.  

Stained glass is changed by light. Audience  members are changed by boring philosophy lectures.

But Aquinas thinks that even something  as evident as this can still be proved.  

The proof goes like this: everything that  is changed is changed by something else;  

but something is changed; therefore,  something is changed by something else.

And this is where we hit rock-bottom. This is  the firm foundation we cannot doubt. For Aquinas  

thinks that anyone who really understands  what it is to change and to be changed will  

understand that something must be changed  by something else. Nothing really changes  

itself. At most, one part of something  will change another part of something.

And that brings us to the final  premise: something changes. Here,  

at last, we have reached what is manifestior—what  is clearer, more obvious, and more evident than  

anything else. Here, at last, we have  reached something genuinely palpable.

The reality of change is something we see with  our eyes, hear with our ears, and touch with our  

hands. It’s not that this premise is more  certain than its companion. We can be just  

as sure that everything changed is changed by  something else as we are that something changes.

But there’s a difference: we can both think  and feel the truth that something changes.  

We can only think the truth that everything  that changes is changed by something else.

As embodied beings, the truth that  something changes is closer to us,  

nearer to us, and dearer to us, because it’s  part and parcel of our embodied experience.

And that’s the starting point for the first  way, the unique foundation on which it’s built:  

something changes; but everything that  changes is changed by something else;  

so something is changed by something else;

but if something is changed by  something else; then there must  

be an unmoved mover—an unchanged cause of  change; so there must be an unmoved mover;  

and an unmoved mover is what we  call ‘a god’; so something is a god.

You can decide for yourself whether  that’s your favorite of the five ways.  

But there’s one thing that’s not up for  discussion: its starting-point is clearly,  

obviously, and evidently the most palpable.

For readings, podcasts, and more videos like  this go to Aquinas101.com. While you're there,  

be sure to sign up for one of our  free video courses on Aquinas. And  

don’t forget to like and share with your  friends, because it matters what you think!