Aptly titled, Carpenter aims to explain Thomas Aquinas’ philosophical approach to God in her article “The Philosophical Approach to God in Thomism”. She demonstrates how Aquinas defines the relationship between the human being and God. Her article also showcases the relation between God and the concepts of perfection and truth, with the latter two being factors to justify his existence. Despite being a dated scholarly article, Carpenter provides a knowledgeable insight into Thomas Aquinas method to utilize philosophical reasoning to explain God and his existence. Carpenter showcases Aquinas separation between the human being and God as necessary to justify God’s existence through philosophical means. He defines God as a “subsistent Being
…show more content…
God as an entity, although superior to the human being, can still be proven so long as there is a connection between the two. Following the ideas in the paragraph, Aquinas seems to show a distinction between two ‘worlds’: the human and the spiritual. Therefore, “any metaphysically necessary community or link can be established between material reality and God” (47). The interest in this statement is Aquinas suggesting the church or simply religion/faith operates as the ‘link’ which connects God to the human. He utilizes theology to support his philosophical approach. However, this can also work the other way. Because faith can lead to blindly belief, he suggests his philosophical approach “turns what was a matter of doubt, opinion or belief, into one of scientific certainty and metaphysical truth” (51). Noticeably, Aquinas also showcases the ability for philosophy to encompass theology, by providing a logical explanation for its necessity. In other words, this necessity to keep theology and philosophy in his explanation of God’s existence enables a fuller understanding of God while maintaining faith. Carpenter further points out, in Aquinas’ work “Reasons in Proof of the Existence of God” how this combination of philosophy and theology because each reason “begin[s] with the statement of a fact of experience” (51). Yet, Thomas …show more content…
In reality, the terms seem circular, meaning they connect with each other. According to Carpenter, esse “is the ultimate actualizing principle in respect of which essence itself plays a passive [role]” while “essence is that which is capable of receive esse and limits esse to a determined measure of actual perfection” (53). Though it may seem a bit complex, the definitions are easier to grasp once replacing ‘esse’ with human knowledge’ and essence with ‘God’s existence’ or even ‘superior knowledge’. Therefore, Aquinas argues human beings are able to conjure up the existence of God due to God enabling this belief. However, the superior knowledge of God’s existence, overstepping human boundaries, also limits the capability for humans to grasp God at his entirety. Despite being ‘passive’, God’s existence also shapes the human conjuration to their ability to visualize perfection, which may not compare to the true purity of his form, but will be close enough to understand. To consider the statement “the mental concept of God presupposes the existence of God” thereby highlights the argument of theology and philosophy working alongside each other in the same manner as ‘esse’ and ‘essence’. The moment God is believed in suggests he already exists in the world (though not necessarily the material world) (56). In short, the understanding of ‘esse’ and ‘essence’ is
God as an entity, although superior to the human being, can still be proven so long as there is a connection between the two. Following the ideas in the paragraph, Aquinas seems to show a distinction between two ‘worlds’: the human and the spiritual. Therefore, “any metaphysically necessary community or link can be established between material reality and God” (47). The interest in this statement is Aquinas suggesting the church or simply religion/faith operates as the ‘link’ which connects God to the human. He utilizes theology to support his philosophical approach. However, this can also work the other way. Because faith can lead to blindly belief, he suggests his philosophical approach “turns what was a matter of doubt, opinion or belief, into one of scientific certainty and metaphysical truth” (51). Noticeably, Aquinas also showcases the ability for philosophy to encompass theology, by providing a logical explanation for its necessity. In other words, this necessity to keep theology and philosophy in his explanation of God’s existence enables a fuller understanding of God while maintaining faith. Carpenter further points out, in Aquinas’ work “Reasons in Proof of the Existence of God” how this combination of philosophy and theology because each reason “begin[s] with the statement of a fact of experience” (51). Yet, Thomas …show more content…
In reality, the terms seem circular, meaning they connect with each other. According to Carpenter, esse “is the ultimate actualizing principle in respect of which essence itself plays a passive [role]” while “essence is that which is capable of receive esse and limits esse to a determined measure of actual perfection” (53). Though it may seem a bit complex, the definitions are easier to grasp once replacing ‘esse’ with human knowledge’ and essence with ‘God’s existence’ or even ‘superior knowledge’. Therefore, Aquinas argues human beings are able to conjure up the existence of God due to God enabling this belief. However, the superior knowledge of God’s existence, overstepping human boundaries, also limits the capability for humans to grasp God at his entirety. Despite being ‘passive’, God’s existence also shapes the human conjuration to their ability to visualize perfection, which may not compare to the true purity of his form, but will be close enough to understand. To consider the statement “the mental concept of God presupposes the existence of God” thereby highlights the argument of theology and philosophy working alongside each other in the same manner as ‘esse’ and ‘essence’. The moment God is believed in suggests he already exists in the world (though not necessarily the material world) (56). In short, the understanding of ‘esse’ and ‘essence’ is