4946931
| Frage | Antworten |
| What is Aquinas' first way? | The first way: CHANGE/MOTION. In the world there are things are in motion and whatever is in motion must have been moved by something else. According to aquinas, this chain of movement cannot go back to infinity. There must have been a first, or prime, mover, which itself was unmoved. The unmoved mover began the movement in everything without actually being moved. Aquinas argued the the prime mover was god. He also believed an object only moved when an external force was applied to it. Aquinas used the example of fire making wood hot. He states that fire that makes wood hot must already have the property of hotness within itself in order to make the wood hot. If it were any other state (e.g. coldness) it would be impossible to make the wood hot. In turn, something must have made the fire change and become alight. |
| What is Aquinas' second way? | The second way: CAUSE. Aquinas observed that nothing can be the cause of itself, as this would mean that it would have have to exist before it existed. This would be a logical impossibility. Aquinas rejected an infinite series of causes and believed that there must have been a first, uncaused, cause. This first cause started the chain of causes that have caused all events to happen. The first cause was god. An example of a line of dominoes can be used to support this way. The first domino (efficient cause) is the one that causes the second (intermediate cause) one to fall. However, the third wouldnt of fallen had the first one hit the second one. So this argument states that nothing can happen unless it has a cause - the dominos fell and the fact they fell means something caused them to fall and the dominoes falling is proof that someone pushed them. From this we can infer: the universe exists and the fact the universe exists is proof that someone/something caused it. The existence of the universe is proof that god caused it. |
| What is Aquinas' third way? | The third way: CONTINGENCY. He states that everything that exists has the possibility of not existing and draws the conclusion that if this were true of everything in existence then nothing would ever come into existence. This is because in order for contingent beings to exist there has to be a non contingent being that brought everything else into existence. For aquinas the necessary being is god. A way of thinking of this idea is to consider the relationship of the parents and the child. Without the existence of the parent, the child cannot come into existence. The child is contingent on the parents for its existence. |
Möchten Sie mit GoConqr kostenlos Ihre eigenen Karteikarten erstellen? Mehr erfahren.