According to Aquinas: The Basics of Aquinas' Philosophy

In this paper, I will discuss how three influential scholars in this order: Augustine, Aquinas, Galileo, delimit science or the bible and the ways their beliefs overlapped or didn’t.

During the Medieval Period, philosophers shifted their focus primarily to proving the existence of God, as well as other religious tenets. Two Saints of the Catholic Church, St. Anselm and St. Thomas Aquinas, developed their own respective proofs for the existence of God. These proofs have gained fame over the subsequent centuries and still face debate and comparison today. Although both St. Anselm and St. Thomas Aquinas offer proofs for the existence of God, the proofs differ drastically due to the distinct argumentative methods utilized by each author, as well as the differing overall strengths and weaknesses each proof yields.

After reading Article 1, Aquinas for Armchair Theologians by Timothy M. Renick most can automatically acquire that Thomas Aquinas was a very influential thinker amongst others when explaining his theological views. His religious views may have differed from others during his time, however, it did influence and encourage others on the different topics of God vs. Satan, and why God has not all the answers, and powers when making sure every human being should not face evil. Aquinas believed that Christians needed to view their basic beliefs in another way to make sense of their own faith when questioning all that God did for each individual. The real question to all this, which a lot of people even question today is “Why is their evil in the World?”

If there are things which are contingent then such things have not always been in existence

In The Five Ways, from Summa Theologica, Thomas Aquinas gives the five ways in which an individual can prove that there is a God. In his arguments, Aquinas uses a posteriori and inductive arguments to help prove the existence of God. An a posteriori argument is an argument that uses statements that you cannot know through pure reason like the statement dogs are descendants of wolves. In contrast, an a priori argument is an argument that consist of statements you can know through pure reason like 2 is the square root of 4. Likewise, an inductive argument is an argument that is an attempt to provide premises that make likely the truth of the conclusion, which is used in Aquinas argument. In contrast, a deductive argument is an argument that attempts to provide premises that guarantee the truth of the conclusion.

Despite the fact that Dante’s reader doesn’t encounter St. Thomas Aquinas within the Comedia until Paradise, the beliefs and teachings of Aquinas are woven throughout the entirety of the famous poem. St. Thomas Aquinas’s cosmology and theology are used as the foundation for Dante’s Comedia, and for this reason it is no surprise that the experiences of the Pilgrim symbolically reflect many of Aquinas’s teachings. The Pilgrim’s experiences on his journey through the afterlife reflect what Aquinas called the, “two-fold truth concerning the divine being, one to

Aquinas claims that “once [those things that are above human reasoning] are revealed by God, they must be accepted by faith” (q.1 a.1 Obj. 1). How does this incorporate itself into the human spirit of curiosity? As Aquinas also points out, there are many things that humanity still does not understand; however, we are still working to understand them through new academic avenues. Once divine revelation is handed down and distributed, does Aquinas expect those who hear it to ignore the ever-present sense of curiosity in their minds? Also, if the truth is still only revealed to a few through divine revelation, albeit without the “admixture of many errors” that would arise had the information been gleaned through philosophical reasoning alone, how is it to be spread rationally (q.1 a.1)?

states that all wars are sinful, but if it is justified it is not a sin; however, I feel that just because one has authority over others, this shouldn't

It is difficult to arrive at a conclusion when debating for the existence of God, in my opinion. However, between the readings I would have to consider Aquinas’ proof to be the most compelling. This is mainly because when trying to defend the existence of God, all I usually hear is that He is the creator of everything, period. Aquinas however put different scenarios into his writing to defend this idea. God, must have been the first to create motion, the first to create a cause, the first to not exist from another being, He must be the only one to have created beings, and is an all- knowing being to which everything in the world is directed to. Aquinas, analyzes the idea that some things would be impossible without the presence of a higher

Thomas Aquinas’ fourth way discusses the subject of “degrees”. According to Aquinas, everything in our world has degrees. There must be an example of something so you can accurately define if it is more or less of a specific perfection. If an object is said to be hotter than another there must be an example of the hottest thing in order to know if it truly is the hottest thing by comparison. The “degrees” refer to being able to say that an object is most good or least good than another object in comparison.

A theistic conception of God refers to a single deity who is an absolutely metaphysical ultimate being. One reason supporting the existence of a theistic God would be Aquinas’s “Second Way” from Aquinas’s Five Ways. His argument, in short, states that at least one thing has been caused to come into existence by something that was not itself caused to exist. This is based on the premises that the chain of cause and effect of things coming into existence is finite, and that nothing can cause its own existence. There has to be something—outside the chain of cause and effect—that causes or has caused at least one other thing to exist. This argument, if accepted, would indicate that a theistic God is an eternal God, because there is no cause of

I have once encountered someone who believed philosophy is just about moral values and nothing else. To an extent that is true however, I have learned you gain knowledge from each other by talking about philosophy. Philosophy is all about thoughts and reflection for understanding what the world offers. Within this essay, it will show the perspectives of wisdom from ancient thinkers apart from medieval thinkers. As well as how these different groups of thinkers see an essential link between philosophical discourse and practice or how can one live life. Epictetus and Pierre Hadot are both concern with ancient philosophy, whereas Remi Brague and Thomas Aquinas studied medieval philosophy. The religious doctrine contains the idea that God freely

For centuries The Five Ways, drawn from St. Thomas Aquinas’s Summa Theologica have been studied, scrutinized, and at the epicenter of heated debate.

1.) Thomas Aquinas believes that humans are born with a clean slate in a state of potency and acquire knowledge through sense experiences by abstraction of the phantasms. His view on how man acquires knowledge rejects Plato’s theory that humans are born with innate species. Along with Plato’s theory of humans understanding corporeal things through innate species, Aquinas also rejects Plato’s theory that in being born with innate species, humans spend their lives recollecting their knowledge.

Thomas Aquinas claims Christianity is a science with the use of the writings of Aristotle on scientific knowledge. Aquinas also makes the claim that theology, or the study God, is a science accepted through Revelation. Faith provides ammunition for Aquinas to state that believers of Christianity have the affirmation of God already inside of them. This claim considered that divine writings were inspired by God. Aquinas stated, "The principles of any science are either in themselves self-evident, are reducible to the knowledge of a higher science are the principles of sacred doctrine." Once these documents had God’s authority approved by faith, they became indemonstrable knowledge,