5 evidence of the existence of God Thomas Aquinas briefly with examples. Criticism and refutation of five proofs of the existence of God Thomas Aquinas

About whether there is a God or not, there are already many argumentshundreds of years. Believers diligently argue their views, while skeptics just as diligently refute them. In this article, we touch on 5 evidence of the existence of God Thomas Aquinas. We will also get acquainted with examples of refutation in order to clearly understand the strengths and weaknesses of this system.

On the evidence of St. Thomas

Saint Thomas Aquinas is the famousCatholic theologian, whose works acquired the status of an official doctrine of the Western church, led by the papal throne in Rome. The above-mentioned five proofs of the existence of the God of Thomas Aquinas were expounded by him in a fundamental work called the Sum of Theology. In it, the author, among other things, argued that it is possible to prove the existence of the Creator in two ways, namely, with the help of the cause and with the help of the investigation. In other words, we are talking about the arguments from cause to effect and from the effect to the cause. Five proofs of the existence of God Thomas Aquinas are based on the second approach. The general logic of them is this: since there are obvious consequences of the cause, the reason itself also has a place to be. Thomas says that the existence of God is not obvious to people. Therefore, it is possible to prove its existence if we consider the Creator as the primary cause of the obvious consequences. This statement is based on the holy Thomas Aquinas. 5 evidence of the existence of God, briefly described, of course, will not allow us to fully appreciate the depth of thought of this outstanding theologian, but will help to make a general impression of the problem.

The proof is first. From traffic

Nowadays this argument of Thomas is usually calledkinetic. It is based on the assertion that all things are in motion. But in itself nothing can move. So, for example, the cart is moved by a horse, the car causes the motor to move, and the sailboat activates the air flow. Molecules, atoms and everything that is in the world move, and all of it gets a boost to action from outside, from something else. And then, in turn, from the third and so on. The end result is an endless chain of causes and effects. But an infinite chain, as Thomas claims, can not be, otherwise there would be no first engine. And if there is no first, then there is no second, and then the movement would not exist at all. Accordingly, there must be a primary source, which is the cause of the movement of everything else, but which itself can not be influenced by third forces. This prime mover is God.

The proof is second. From the producing cause

This argument is based on the assertion thatevery thing, every phenomenon is a consequence of some producing cause. The tree, according to him, grows out of the seed, the living being is born from the mother, the glass is made from sand and so on. In this case, no thing in the world can be the cause of itself, since in that case it would be necessary to recognize that it existed before its appearance. In other words, an egg can not demolish itself, and a house can build itself. And in the end, again, there is a chain of infinite causes and effects, which must rest on the source. His existence is not a consequence of the anticipatory cause, but he himself is the cause of everything else. And if not for him at all, there would be no process of producing causes and effects. This source is God.

Proof of the third. From necessity and accident

Like all 5 proofs of the existence of God ThomasAkvinsky, this argument is based on the law of cause and effect. However, it is very peculiar. Foma states that in the world there are random things that can exist, or they may not exist. Once they really were, but before that they were not. And it is impossible to imagine, in Thomas's opinion, that they arose by themselves. Accordingly, there must be a reason for their appearance. Ultimately, this leads us to postulate the existence of such an entity that would be necessary in itself and would not have external reasons for being a necessity for all others. This essence of Thomas and defines the concept of "God".

Proof of the fourth. From the degree of perfection

Thomas Aquinas 5 Evidence of the Existence of Godbased on Aristotle's formal logic. One of them says that in all things that are in the world, different degrees of perfection are manifested. This refers to the concepts of goodness, beauty, nobility and form of existence. However, the degree of perfection is known to us only in comparison with anything else. In other words, they are relative. Further, Aquinas concludes that against a background of all relative things there must be a certain phenomenon endowed with perfection in an absolute degree. For example, you can compare things by beauty either with respect to the worst, or relatively better things. But there must be an absolute criterion, beyond which nothing can be. This is the most perfect phenomenon in all respects and is what is called God.

Proof of the fifth. From the leadership of the world

Like all 5 proofs of the existence of God ThomasAquinas, this is based on the idea of ​​the root cause. In this case, it is considered in terms of the meaningfulness and expediency that the world and its living creatures possess. The latter tend to something better, that is, consciously or unconsciously pursue a goal. For example, a continuation of the family, a comfortable existence and so on. Therefore, Thomas concludes that there must be a supreme being that intelligently manages the world and creates its goals for everything. Of course, this creature can only be God.

5 evidence of the existence of God Thomas Aquinas and their criticism

Even a superficial analysis of the abovearguments shows that they are all aspects of the same logical chain. 5 evidence of the existence of God Thomas Aquinas focused mainly not on the higher essence, but on the material world. The latter acts in them as a consequence or a complex of different consequences of a single root cause, which itself has nothing to do with, but which must necessarily exist. Thomas calls it God, but, nevertheless, this does not bring us closer to understanding what God is.

Consequently, these arguments can not in any wayprove the existence of a confessional Lord, Christian or some other. On their basis, it can not be asserted that there is precisely that Creator who is worshiped by followers of the Abrahamic religions. Moreover, if we analyze five proofs of the existence of God Thomas Aquinas, it becomes clear that the postulation of the Creator of the world is rather not a necessary logical conclusion, but a hypothetical assumption. This is evident from the fact that the nature of the underlying cause is not disclosed in them, and it may turn out to be quite different from what we imagine it to be. These arguments do not convince the truth of the metaphysical picture of the world, proposed by Thomas Aquinas.

5 evidence of the existence of God briefly illuminatethe problem of our ignorance of the fundamental principles of the universe. Theoretically, it may turn out that our world is a creation of some kind of supercivilization, or a consequence of the action of the undiscovered laws of the universe, or some kind of emanation and so on. In other words, any fantastic conception and theory that does not have anything in common with God, as we imagine it, can be proposed as the root cause. Thus, God as the Creator of the world and the root cause of everything is just one of the likely answers to the questions that Thomas formulated. Accordingly, these arguments can not serve as evidence in the literal sense of the word.

Another counterterrorism concerns the fourthproof, in which a certain gradation of the perfection of phenomena in the world is postulated. But if you think about what can guarantee that concepts such as beauty, goodness, nobility, and so on, are quite objective characteristics, and not subjective categories of the human mind, that is, the product of mental differentiation? In fact, what and how does beauty measure, and what is the nature of the aesthetic sense? And is it possible to think of God within the framework of human concepts of good and evil, which, as history shows, constantly undergo changes? Ethical values ​​change - values ​​and aesthetic values ​​change. What yesterday seemed to be the standard of beauty, today is a sample of mediocrity. What was good two hundred years ago, today qualifies as extremism and a crime against humanity. The inscription of God into this framework of human concepts makes him just another mental category, and the same relative. Therefore, identifying the Supreme with absolute good or absolute good is not evidence of his objective existence.

Moreover - such a God will certainly bebe beyond the bounds of evil, filth and ugliness. That is, it can not be an absolute evil, for example. We will have to postulate the existence of several gods, personifying various mutually exclusive phenomena in their absolute degree. None of them, respectively, due to their limitations, can not be a real God who, as an absolute, must contain everything, and therefore, be one. Simply put, no concepts and categories of the human mind are irrelevant to God, and therefore can not serve as proof of his being.