St. Thomas Aquinas's Cosmological Argument

418 Words2 Pages
Analyzing Saint Thomas Aquinas’s Cosmological Argument Saint Thomas Aquinas was a Dominican Friar who lived from 1225 to 1274 AD. His Cosmological Argument for the existence of God remains to this day, one of the most well-known arguments of its kind. Aquinas’s argument is known as a Posteriori argument, which means that it is based on knowledge after an experience. The Cosmological Argument states that: 1) An empirical fact exists 2) Something cannot be the cause of itself 3) There cannot be an infinite regress of causes 4) Thus, God exists This argument has three premises (statements that the conclusion is based on), and one conclusion. Premise one, is that an empirical fact (a source of knowledge acquired by observation) exists, this premise proves itself true, in that almost all knowledge is acquired through observation. Premise two states that something cannot be the cause of itself, meaning that something cannot make itself exist; just as trees exist because a seed was planted or a rock is created from a volcano. Premise three tells us that there cannot be an infinite regress of causes for something, this means that through reasoning there is an explanation for the cause. Based on these premises, our conclusion that God exists makes sense. Saint Thomas’s argument for the existence of god is a valid one; this is because there are no false premises. The conclusion that god exists is drawn from the argument made, but not directly. Because none of the premises mention God as a causing factor, the conclusion that he exists requires a sort of mental leap. Aquinas’s argument is a sound one, but the fact remains that there are multiple conclusions that could have been drawn from these premises, and not all of them include God. Even with the problem with the conclusion, all of Saint Aquinas’s premises are true, making the argument a sound
Open Document