Thomas Aquinas’s arguments consist mainly about reasons on God and how it can be proved that God exists. He incorporates the ideas of metaphysics and ethics to demonstrate the existence of a higher power. I agree to his argument that the existence of God is self-evident amongst is also demonstrable which is agreeable. The concept of self-evident is defined as no reason or proof is required to prove an objective. In Aquinas’s terms, self-evident can be associated with the belief that the existence of God doesn’t require any indications. My indication is stating that God’s existence is self-evident however must be demonstrated to prove the essence of God. The proposition that God is self-evident can be distinguished in many circumstances.
…show more content…
Who created nature? Who created a soul? Who created man? Without the existence of God none of these aspects would be possible. Nature is the phenomena that includes plants and animals and how the processes effects the living world. The process of photosynthesis is largely admired by plants because it’s how plants synthesize food using sunlight and generates oxygen for the atmosphere. Oxygen is then brought to us humans which benefits us to breathe. From this analogy, we can conclude that without nature humans would not exist. In Aristotle’s point of view, everything that is living contains a soul, therefore nature and man acquire souls to be living. He defines the soul for something that accommodates matter, form, and the compound of matter and form. Deriving the existence of man can only be considered that God must’ve created an individual to pass his teachings. Man then considered that God had a purpose in which his teaching can be expanded and aggregate his knowledge. If God was not self-evident then how did man came to be. The creation of man was derived by a source in which we live in the modern era today. This statement is true considering that we accept that God is the source for everything that existed from the
Who created nature? Who created a soul? Who created man? Without the existence of God none of these aspects would be possible. Nature is the phenomena that includes plants and animals and how the processes effects the living world. The process of photosynthesis is largely admired by plants because it’s how plants synthesize food using sunlight and generates oxygen for the atmosphere. Oxygen is then brought to us humans which benefits us to breathe. From this analogy, we can conclude that without nature humans would not exist. In Aristotle’s point of view, everything that is living contains a soul, therefore nature and man acquire souls to be living. He defines the soul for something that accommodates matter, form, and the compound of matter and form. Deriving the existence of man can only be considered that God must’ve created an individual to pass his teachings. Man then considered that God had a purpose in which his teaching can be expanded and aggregate his knowledge. If God was not self-evident then how did man came to be. The creation of man was derived by a source in which we live in the modern era today. This statement is true considering that we accept that God is the source for everything that existed from the