Five Ways (Aquinas)
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
Revision as of 21:54, 16 August 2010 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Current revision Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) (Quinque viae moved to Five Ways (Aquinas)) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Template}} | {{Template}} | ||
- | The '''cosmological argument''' is an [[argument]] for the existence of a [[Primum movens|First Cause]] (or instead, an [[Uncaused cause]]) to the universe, and by extension is often used as an argument for the existence of an "unconditioned" or "supreme" being, usually then identified as [[God]]. It is traditionally known as an '''argument from universal causation''', an '''argument from first cause''', the '''causal argument''' or the '''argument from existence'''. Whichever term is employed, there are three basic variants of the argument, each with subtle yet important distinctions: the arguments from [[Causality|causation]], ''[[in esse]]'' and ''[[in fieri]]'', and the argument from [[Contingency (philosophy)|contingency]]. | + | The '''''Quinque viae''''', '''''Five Ways''''', or '''''Five Proofs''''' are five [[Logical argument|arguments]] for the [[existence of God]] summarized by the 13th century [[Roman Catholic]] theologian [[St. Thomas Aquinas]] in his book, ''[[Summa Theologica]]''. The five ways are; the argument of the [[unmoved mover]], the argument of the [[first cause]], the [[Cosmological argument#The argument from contingency|argument from contingency]], the [[argument from degree]] and the [[teleological argument]]. Aquinas left out from his list several arguments that were already in existence at the time, such as the [[ontological argument]] of [[Saint Anselm]], because he did not believe that they worked. In the 20th century, the Roman Catholic priest and philosopher [[Frederick Copleston]], devoted much of his works to fully explaining and expanding on Aquinas' five ways. |
+ | |||
+ | The arguments are designed to prove the existence of a [[monotheism|monotheistic]] God, namely the [[Judeo-Christian]] God (though they could also support notions of God in other [[Abrahamic]] faiths that believe in a monotheistic God, such as [[Islam]], [[Rastafari]] and the [[Bahá'í Faith]]), but as a set they do not work when used to provide evidence for the existence of [[polytheism|polytheistic]], [[pantheism|pantheistic]], [[panentheism|panentheistic]] or [[pandeism|pandeistic]] deities such as those found in major religions like [[Hinduism]], [[Shinto]] and [[Wicca]]. | ||
+ | == Controversy == | ||
+ | |||
+ | === Criticism === | ||
+ | Criticism of the [[cosmological argument]] emerged in the 18th century by the philosophers [[David Hume]] and [[Immanuel Kant]]. | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[Richard Dawkins]] criticized Aquinas' collection of arguments in his book ''[[The God Delusion]]''. He asserts that the first three arguments are essentially [[cosmological argument]]s that rely upon an infinite regress to which God is [[special pleading|unjustifiably immune]]. He summarizes the fourth argument. | ||
+ | |||
+ | :''The Argument from Degree.'' We notice that things in the world differ. There are degrees of, say, goodness or perfection. But we judge these degrees only by a comparison with a maximum. Humans can be both good and bad, so the maximum goodness cannot rest in us. Therefore there must be some other maximum to set the standard for perfection, and we call that maximum God.<br><br>That's an argument? You might as well say, people vary in smelliness but we can make the comparison only by reference to a perfect maximum of conceivable smelliness. Therefore there must exist a pre-eminently peerless stinker, and we call him God. Or substitute any dimension of comparison you like, and derive an equivalently fatuous conclusion. --''[[The God Delusion]]'' | ||
+ | |||
+ | Dawkins says the fifth argument claims the necessity of a designer, considering that biological life has complexity which appears designed. However [[evolution]] via [[natural selection]] explains its complexity and diversity, and [[abiogenesis]] explains its origin. Paul Almond criticized the logic behind the third argument in his writing. Specifically he argued that one cannot prove that an object exists based only on the possibility that it exists. In other words, a "most perfect being" possibly exists, but does not necessarily exist. | ||
- | The basic premise of all of these is that something caused the Universe to exist, and this First Cause must be God. It has been used by various theologians and philosophers over the centuries, from the [[ancient Greece|ancient Greek]] [[Plato]] and [[Aristotle]] to the medieval [[St. Thomas Aquinas]] and the 20th century [[Frederick Copleston]]. | ||
- | == See also == | ||
- | * [[Biblical cosmology]] | ||
- | * [[Chaos]]; [[Chaos (mythology)]] | ||
- | * [[Deism]] | ||
- | * [[Cosmogony]] | ||
- | * [[Creation myth]] | ||
- | * [[Dating Creation]] | ||
- | * [[Determinism]] | ||
- | * [[Infinitism]] | ||
- | * [[Infinite regress]] | ||
- | * [[Logos]] | ||
- | * [[Quinquae viae]] | ||
- | * [[Temporal finitism]] | ||
- | * [[Timeline of the Big Bang]] | ||
- | * [[Unmoved mover]] | ||
{{GFDL}} | {{GFDL}} |
Current revision
Related e |
Featured: |
The Quinque viae, Five Ways, or Five Proofs are five arguments for the existence of God summarized by the 13th century Roman Catholic theologian St. Thomas Aquinas in his book, Summa Theologica. The five ways are; the argument of the unmoved mover, the argument of the first cause, the argument from contingency, the argument from degree and the teleological argument. Aquinas left out from his list several arguments that were already in existence at the time, such as the ontological argument of Saint Anselm, because he did not believe that they worked. In the 20th century, the Roman Catholic priest and philosopher Frederick Copleston, devoted much of his works to fully explaining and expanding on Aquinas' five ways.
The arguments are designed to prove the existence of a monotheistic God, namely the Judeo-Christian God (though they could also support notions of God in other Abrahamic faiths that believe in a monotheistic God, such as Islam, Rastafari and the Bahá'í Faith), but as a set they do not work when used to provide evidence for the existence of polytheistic, pantheistic, panentheistic or pandeistic deities such as those found in major religions like Hinduism, Shinto and Wicca.
Controversy
Criticism
Criticism of the cosmological argument emerged in the 18th century by the philosophers David Hume and Immanuel Kant.
Richard Dawkins criticized Aquinas' collection of arguments in his book The God Delusion. He asserts that the first three arguments are essentially cosmological arguments that rely upon an infinite regress to which God is unjustifiably immune. He summarizes the fourth argument.
- The Argument from Degree. We notice that things in the world differ. There are degrees of, say, goodness or perfection. But we judge these degrees only by a comparison with a maximum. Humans can be both good and bad, so the maximum goodness cannot rest in us. Therefore there must be some other maximum to set the standard for perfection, and we call that maximum God.
That's an argument? You might as well say, people vary in smelliness but we can make the comparison only by reference to a perfect maximum of conceivable smelliness. Therefore there must exist a pre-eminently peerless stinker, and we call him God. Or substitute any dimension of comparison you like, and derive an equivalently fatuous conclusion. --The God Delusion
Dawkins says the fifth argument claims the necessity of a designer, considering that biological life has complexity which appears designed. However evolution via natural selection explains its complexity and diversity, and abiogenesis explains its origin. Paul Almond criticized the logic behind the third argument in his writing. Specifically he argued that one cannot prove that an object exists based only on the possibility that it exists. In other words, a "most perfect being" possibly exists, but does not necessarily exist.