Aquinas Comological Argument Essay

959 WordsFeb 2, 20144 Pages
Explain Aquinas’s Cosmological Argument Thomas Aquinas in his book “Summa Theological” puts forward several a posteriori proofs for the existence of God. One of which, the Cosmological Argument, an inductive argument, can be seen to encompass three differing aspects of the Universe, from which Aquinas asserts a belief in God. Aquinas argues for the existence of a Prime Mover, Efficient Causer and Necessary Being, which he labels as God. Much of Aquinas arguments are taken from the Aristotelian tradition. In fact, many people view Aquinas arguments as a mere Christianisation of Aristotle’s. The first version of the Cosmological argument takes into consideration the motion of objects within the world, deducing from this the existence of a Prime Mover. The first premises states “everything in the universe moves”, the second says that” for something to be in motion it must be moved by something else”. For example, a ball which is in motion, rolling on a flat surface, must have been caused to move by something else. Thirdly, Aquinas postulates that “motion cannot go on forever”. This alludes to ‘infinite regress’; the notion that a chain of events can go back forever. However, this does not appear plausible because there would need to be a first mover to begin the chain of cause and effect in the first place, for example a chain of dominoes can only begin by the movement of an external force such as a persons hand. Thus Aquinas concludes that “there must be a Prime Mover present which begins the chain of movement in the universe and does not need an efficient cause itself”. Prior to Aquinas, Aristotle stated the existence of a Prime Mover, a being that began the series of motion: “the series must start with something, since nothing can come from nothing”. However, where as Aristotle concludes that this Prime Mover is uninterested with the Universe he creates,

More about Aquinas Comological Argument Essay

Open Document