The existence of God is always important in the aspect of philosophy. St. Thomas Aquinas explains what he believes is the five reasons god exists. The five reasons he believes why God exist is the Argument from Motion, Efficient Causes, Possibility and Necessity, Gradation of Being, and Design. The definition of God means that which nothing greater can be meant. St. Aquinas is a known philosopher for his discussions of the relationship between faith and the reasons, including the five reasons and proof why God existence is true, while developing Aristotelian doctrines within the church (PBF 42). St. Thomas Aquinas believed that objects lacked consciousness and it lacked consciousness for a reason. These same objects usually end up achieving
…show more content…
St. Thomas Aquinas’s sees his conclusion as being correct with a reflection back to his premises because God is the reason that the world is intelligent. How else can these things be possible and have purpose behind them if they aren’t being guided by someone who has structure. In quote, he states “There therefore is some intelligence which directs everything in nature towards an end, and this we call God” (PBF 44). Aquinas is basically saying overall that nothing just ends by chance, but by someone that is necessarily able to end it, which is his God. As Aquinas states within his fourth reason, he says “therefore there is something which is the cause of being, of goodness, and of whatever other perfection that there may be in things (PBF 44). Again, Aquinas is giving us the idea again that whatever or whoever this person may be, he is the reason behind the goodness or success. “The end” which this argument is mainly discussing is when the object has a goal and it strives to obtain that goal, not through inheritance within self but through something that is giving it …show more content…
Of course, Humes only feel religious beliefs can be rational if they have concrete evidence to support. Humes doesn’t question whether God exists or not, but if we as people can come up with a conclusion on Gods nature and being. In respondence to what Aquinas states and his five reason, I believe Humes wouldn’t completely agree with Aquinas. I say this because Humes is all about being rational. If there isn’t enough evidence in the world, he believes that there may not be a way to find out if God a powerful, wise and perfect. Aquinas basically offers reasons why change could happen, how somethings may be a necessity and fail, and the quality behind something. However, his reasons don’t give any insight behind why religion or religious beliefs could be rational from different perspectives. Humes have 3 characters in his dialogue, which is Philo, Cleanthes and Demea. All of these men explain their stance on religion, God and they give insight on their theological differences according to Humes stance on religious beliefs. The first objection that Hume would have according to Aquinas reasoning is his example with the idea of change. Cleanthes wouldn’t object to this because Aquinas ultimately believes that intelligent design from the govern world is all occurring because of God. However, Cleanthes feel that we can take
St. Thomas Aquinas’s sees his conclusion as being correct with a reflection back to his premises because God is the reason that the world is intelligent. How else can these things be possible and have purpose behind them if they aren’t being guided by someone who has structure. In quote, he states “There therefore is some intelligence which directs everything in nature towards an end, and this we call God” (PBF 44). Aquinas is basically saying overall that nothing just ends by chance, but by someone that is necessarily able to end it, which is his God. As Aquinas states within his fourth reason, he says “therefore there is something which is the cause of being, of goodness, and of whatever other perfection that there may be in things (PBF 44). Again, Aquinas is giving us the idea again that whatever or whoever this person may be, he is the reason behind the goodness or success. “The end” which this argument is mainly discussing is when the object has a goal and it strives to obtain that goal, not through inheritance within self but through something that is giving it …show more content…
Of course, Humes only feel religious beliefs can be rational if they have concrete evidence to support. Humes doesn’t question whether God exists or not, but if we as people can come up with a conclusion on Gods nature and being. In respondence to what Aquinas states and his five reason, I believe Humes wouldn’t completely agree with Aquinas. I say this because Humes is all about being rational. If there isn’t enough evidence in the world, he believes that there may not be a way to find out if God a powerful, wise and perfect. Aquinas basically offers reasons why change could happen, how somethings may be a necessity and fail, and the quality behind something. However, his reasons don’t give any insight behind why religion or religious beliefs could be rational from different perspectives. Humes have 3 characters in his dialogue, which is Philo, Cleanthes and Demea. All of these men explain their stance on religion, God and they give insight on their theological differences according to Humes stance on religious beliefs. The first objection that Hume would have according to Aquinas reasoning is his example with the idea of change. Cleanthes wouldn’t object to this because Aquinas ultimately believes that intelligent design from the govern world is all occurring because of God. However, Cleanthes feel that we can take