Aquinas - 3
Arguments for the Existence of God
Aquinas' Objection to Self-Evidence
Aquinas presents that the existence of God is self-evident.
God is defined as that which nothing greater can be conceived.
Since God exists in the mind, it follows by definition that God must exist in reality as well.
Ontological Argument
Influenced by Anselm's argument; starts from God’s definition.
If God exists only in the mind and not in reality, a greater being could be conceived (existing in both).
This leads to a contradiction, contradicting God's definition.
Response to the Ontological Argument
Aquinas doubts that everyone understands God in the same way.
God might be seen as a physical entity, which complicates the argument.
Even if God is considered that which nothing greater can be conceived, it doesn’t guarantee actual existence.
Distinctions in Self-Evidence
Two types of self-evidence: self-evident in itself and self-evident to us.
A proposition may be self-evident intrinsically but not for those who don’t understand the terms.
The proposition "God exists" is self-evident in itself but not self-evident to us, requiring demonstration.
Feasibility of Demonstrating God's Existence
Some argue God’s existence can’t be proven because it’s an article of faith.
Aquinas counters that knowledge of God’s existence is a preamble to faith, not merely an article of faith.
Faith presupposes some natural knowledge and does not exclude scientific proof of God's existence.
Arguments Against God's Existence
Problem of Evil: If God exists, there would be no evil (infinitely good implies absence of evil).
However, evil exists, thus God cannot exist.
Aquinas' Reply: God allows evil to bring about greater good, referencing Augustine.
Occam's Razor Argument: Simpler explanations (natural principles) account for phenomena without needing God.
Aquinas counters that natural principles must be traced back to God as the first cause, denying the sufficiency of science alone.