The first way is about the argument of motion. It states that there must be a mover in order for a thing to move. God is considered the first mover by the people. A thing is at rest if there is no mover. It is impossible for a thing to move without a thing moving it.
Aquinas presupposes that the natural state of things is rest. This may mean that all object are at rest. It will only be in motion if someone or something move it. In the field of Science, objects that are at rest is at the state of static. It needs a kinetic energy in order to make the object in motion.
Newton based his conclusion on a scientific study. Motion requires more explanation because it is more complicated than those things that are at rest. If Newton's view is correct,this will not invalidate the argument of Aquinas. They both have the same idea but they explained it in different ways. Newton uses scientific basis in his argument.
2. If everything that exists must have a cause, as Aquinas contends, what caused god? Is the question what or who made god a valid question? Why and why not? Defend your answer.
Aquinas believes that the existence of everything must have a cause. It is explained in the second way that God is the efficient cause. He claims that to take away the cause is to take away the effect. In this argument, he is trying to say that we wouldn't exist if God does not exist.This conclusion is contrary to the scientific explanation how humans came to this world.
What caused God? this is a question that cannot be answer by us. This is due to the fact that we don't even know how we came into this world. Faith is the only way that can help us forget this question. We will not tend to ask or doubt the existence of God if we have faith in him.
The question about who or what made God is invalid. This is invalid because God is infinite. It means that we cannot fully know God. No one has ever answer this question because it is impossible to know an infinite being. It's all just a matter of faith.
No comments:
Post a Comment