It is important to know the cause why does an object exist. Humans are gifted with the intellectual capacity. This enable us to think and question things that are existing in our environment. There should be a cause to explain everything because it is said that there is no effect when you take away the cause. This is stated in the second way.
We cannot eliminate the idea of first cause because this will create another cause in order for us to explain the existence of an object. To eliminate the first cause means eradicating the existence of God. As we all know fire is the cause of heat. Heat won't exist if there is no fire.
I believe that it is very impossible to eliminate the idea of first cause. There should always have a cause for there to have an effect. God is the cause why we exist. We are the cause why other things also exist. It is like a chain reaction created by a supreme being.
Granting that all things are contingent, hence perishable( thus, there could have been a time in the past when nothing was in existence as Aquinas argued in the third way), is it not also possible that even if all things are contingent, their finite life spans could overlap so that there is no point in time when all of them ceased to exist? Think for instance, the life span of human beings. Does this line of reasoning refute the argument for the existence of a necessary being?
No comments:
Post a Comment