Aquinas' Cosmological Argument Flashcards
What observation did Aquinas make about the cosmos?
Aquinas observed that the cosmos’ basic processes do not explain themselves, and that all things in the universe move and change due to cause and effect.
What is the basis of Aquinas’ third way?
Aquinas’ third way is a posteriori and inductive, based on the observation of contingent things in the universe.
What does Aquinas’ third way argue?
It argues that everything in the universe is contingent and that something must exist necessarily to explain the existence of contingent beings.
How does Aquinas define contingency?
Contingent beings are those that can either exist or not exist, implying they don’t have to exist but do.
What conclusion did Aquinas draw from the observation of contingency?
Aquinas concluded that something must exist necessarily, otherwise, nothing would exist now.
What is the difference between caused and uncaused necessary beings according to Aquinas?
Caused necessary beings depend on something to bring them into existence, while uncaused necessary beings exist out of necessity and do not rely on anything else.
How does Aquinas define God in the context of the cosmological argument?
God is understood as the uncaused necessary being who brings existence to all caused necessary beings and contingent beings.
What is the argument from contingency and necessity?
Aquinas argues that if everything is contingent, there would be a time when nothing existed. Therefore, something must exist necessarily, and that is God.
What is the problem with an infinite series of necessary beings?
An infinite series of necessary beings would provide no explanation for the existence of anything, so there must be an uncaused necessary being.
What role does ‘necessary existence’ play in Aquinas’ argument?
Necessary existence is essential because contingent beings require a necessary being to explain their existence.
What did Hume and Russell criticize about Aquinas’ third way?
They rejected the idea that any being could be logically necessary and questioned the assumption that the universe must have a cause.
What is the fallacy of composition, according to Russell?
The fallacy of composition is assuming that what is true of parts of a whole is true for the whole (e.g., hydrogen and oxygen are not wet, so water is not wet).
How does Russell apply the fallacy of composition to Aquinas’ third way?
Russell argued that just because each event in the universe has a cause doesn’t mean the entire universe must have a cause.
What is Reichenbach’s response to Russell’s criticism?
Reichenbach suggests that Aquinas’ argument does not commit the fallacy of composition because the universe’s contingency follows from its parts.
What is Hume’s criticism regarding necessary beings?
Hume argued that there is no contradiction in the idea that any being, including God, could not exist, and thus, the concept of necessary beings is flawed.
How does Aquinas respond to Hume’s criticism?
Aquinas clarifies that he means metaphysical necessity, not logical necessity, when discussing God’s necessary existence in his third way.
What is metaphysical necessity, according to Aquinas?
Metaphysical necessity refers to a being whose existence is required by its essence, not simply a logical necessity as in the Ontological Argument.
What does Hume suggest about the universe being a necessary being?
Hume proposes that the material universe itself could be the necessary being, providing an explanation for its existence without invoking God.
How does Aquinas respond to Hume’s suggestion about the universe being necessary?
Aquinas acknowledges that matter could be necessary but insists that even if matter exists necessarily, it still requires an uncaused necessary being (God) to explain its existence.
What is Russell’s criticism of the universe as a brute fact?
Russell suggests that the universe exists as an unexplainable brute fact, offering no causal explanation for its existence.
How does Aquinas counter Russell’s view of the universe as a brute fact?
Aquinas argues that science operates on the assumption that there are no brute facts, and thus, the universe must have an explanation outside itself.
What is the main debate between Aquinas and Hume regarding the explanation of the universe?
The debate centers on whether the universe’s existence is best explained by a necessary being (God) or if the universe itself is necessary.
What is the status of Aquinas’ argument as a ‘proof’ of God’s existence?
Aquinas’ argument is inductive and deals with probabilities, rather than providing definitive proof, making it more reasonable than a logical proof.
How does Gerry J. Hughes defend the cosmological argument?
Hughes suggests that we accept different forms of proof based on what is reasonable and that the universe requires an explanation outside itself, which can be reasonably attributed to God.
How does Aquinas’ argument relate to religious faith?
For religious believers, Aquinas’ third way provides a rational foundation for the belief in God, supporting the idea that the universe owes its existence to an uncaused necessary being.
