Comparing Aquinas And Descartes Arguments For The...

Aquinas and Descartes both have arguments for the existence of God, with some similarities and a multitude of differences. Descartes presents two major premises in his argument with his degrees of reality principle and his casual adequacy principle. It is possible for Descartes to be influenced by Aquinas, but the arguments for the same thing differ greatly that even if any inspiration Descartes could have pulled from Aquinas work is minimal, to say the least. Comparing Aquinas and Descartes they both in a way have arguments for cause in proving the existence of God. Aquinas in that nor indeed it is possible, that anything is the efficient cause of itself (The Second Way, 2) and there needs to be a first cause that is the cause of all†¦show more content†¦To Aquinas things either exist or they do not, to Descartes things can be on levels of existence. One of Descartes main reasons for the existence of God is that, God put the idea of himself in Descartes head Hence there remains only the idea of God, concerning which we much consider whether it is something which cannot have proceeded from me myself, (Third Meditation, pg 16). Aquinas Five Ways are trying to prove the existence of God to others, while Descartes is trying to prove the existence of God to himself. The major premises in Descartes Third Meditation are his degrees of reality principle and his causal adequacy principle. Descartes degrees of reality come from his ideas of more or less real, things can fall under properties being less real, like colors, to finite substances, to infinite substances being the most real, like God But I understand God to be actually infinite, so that he can add nothing to His supreme perfection (Third Meditation, pg 17). Something like a table can be a finite substance but the color of the table, its brownness, is something considered to be less real to Descartes, a less real property. Descartes casual adequacy principle which goes like Now it is manifest by the natural light that there must be as much reality in the efficient and total cause as in its effect, (Third Meditation, pg 15) meaning that something is not created from nothing, like the stone. The casual adequacy principle canShow MoreRelatedThis essay will be examining the key arguments for th e existence of God, in order to discuss the3100 Words   |  13 Pageskey arguments for the existence of God, in order to discuss the claim that â€Å"it is wrong to believe in anything without sufficient evidence†- with reference to the non-existence of God. It will be exploring both a priori and an a posteriori argument for the existence of God. It will solely be concentrating on the Theological argument, Cosmological argument and the Ontological argument, in order, to analyse their significance and contribution in vindicating the claim for the existence of God. TheRead MoreThe Logical Problem Of Evil1535 Words   |  7 Pagesthe inconsistent triad, this being that the following propositions; God is omnipotent, omnibenevolent and evil exists, are inconsistent. Also known as a reduction ad absurdum argument, whereby all three propositions cannot be true together. Theists, like Swinburne, come to the conclusion that the three propositions are compatible with one another, w hereas atheists, like Mackie, believe that they are incompatible and therefore God does not exist. I shall be arguing in line with Swinburne’s view, describingRead MoreDo God Exist ?1960 Words   |  8 Pagescuriosity, arguments for the existence of God have been made over the years. Basically, these arguments are divided into two large groups i.e. logical and metaphysical. Actually, these arguments seek to prove that the existence of a being or having faith with at least one attribute that only God could have is logically necessary.    2. Believing and having faith in God will only resort to one thing—goodness.    3. Faith has something to do with one’s conception about God.    4. The existence of GodRead MoreChristian Ethics in a Postmodern World Essay example6531 Words   |  27 PagesDerrida and other recent French thinkers . . .. It can be called deconstructive or eliminative postmodernism. It overcomes the modern worldview through an antiworldview: it deconstructs or eliminates the ingredients necessary for a worldview, such as God, self, purpose, meaning, a real world, and truth as correspondence. While motivated in some cases by the ethical concern to forestall totalitarian systems, this type of postmodern thought issues in relativism, even nihilism. It would be called ultramodernism