This contradicts the assumption that God is the creator of all norms. (Based on Darwall 's Philosphical Ethics p. 42-44). 2) God created us, therefore we must follow his commands out of gratitude. Again, we face the problem that there appears to be a norm that exists independently from his command: that you should show gratitude, which seems inconsistent. (Darwall 's Philosophical Ethics p. 44).
The objection against premise three states: “There can be an infinite series of numbers; why can’t there be an infinite series of past causes (PowerPoint 384)?” Thomas Aquinas is a famous philosopher who is well known for his theological writings. Here, Aquinas steps in to defend this premise saying that “if there were an infinite regress of causes, we could not have gotten to the present moment because we would have had to go through an infinite series to get here, and it is impossible to go through an infinite series (PowerPoint, 384).” William Lane Craig then comes in and discusses the claim of premise three and Aquinas’ defence and states that, “the idea of an actual infinite number of anything leads to contradictions. Both Thomas Aquinas and William Lane Craig’s defence claims help show that premise three is true, proving that the first half of the first cause argument is a sound
Born in 1949, the Christian philosopher and theologian, William Craig is most known for his defense of the Kalam cosmological argument. The Kalam cosmological argument is rooted in Islamic theologians of the Ilm al-Kalam tradition. The Ilm al-Kalam also known as Islamic natural theology attempts to justify the belief in God by constructing arguments for God’s existence. The main specificity of the Kalam is that it relies on the premise that the universe began to exist. Craig’s main argument is against the possibility of existence of actual infinities he believes there is always a cause of existence.
Thomas Aquinas is the second critique of Anselm’s position. Take note that Aquinas assumed that the existence of God is obvious. He supported cosmological argument to prove that God exists. The cosmological argument uses the physical things that exist in the universe to demonstrate God’s existence. In his criticism of Anselm’s argument, Aquinas disagrees with the use of the word “God” and argues only some who hear the word “God” understands what it means (Himma, 4).
Therefore, because we certainly do see movement, there must be a first efficient cause 7. A first efficient cause is only achievable by God (Premise), therefore God exists. Notice how this entire argument only has two premises, being that everything has a cause, and God is the only thing able to be the first efficient cause. This leaves the argument in a very strong position as the first premise seems true enough by tradition, and there is no alternative to God in the second premise. If we are under the belief then that the argument is inherently valid and that we can take the premises on their word, then the conclusion is sound and God must
PH2211 In this essay, I will first break down Anselm’s ontological argument with a powerful criticism, and then defend Anselm’s position. Following that, I will analyze both positions critically and provide my own stand regarding Anselm’s argument. The problem with Anselm’s ontological argument provided by Rowe in his book is the problem of definition. Gaunilo noticed that the definition of God as “a being than which none greater is possible” is infallible, in the sense that, the definition itself would force God into existence whether or not it is true. In order to show how this works, Gaunilo proposed a perfect island where it is “an island than which no greater island is possible”.
The philosopher William Paley discussed the existence of God in the so called the teleological argument. The teleological argument is also known as Intelligent Design, or the argument from design. In order to explain the existence of God, William Paley gave us what is known as an argument by analogy. This form of inductive argument invites us to consider a particular state of affairs. For instance, let us set two situations; situation A for which we are already likely to have certain beliefs, and then likens it to situation B, with which we are less familiar.
In this argument the main point often debated the attempt to prove the existence of God that begins with the observation of the telos of nature. The teleological argument moves to the conclusion that there must exist a designer and that designer is God. The deduction from design to designer is why the teleological argument is also known as the design argument. Design arguments typically consist of (1) a premise that states that the material universe exhibits some empirical property x; (2) a sub-argument that states that x is persuasive evidence of intelligent design or purpose, and (3) a premise that concludes that the most probable explanation for the fact that the material universe exhibits x is that there exists an intelligent
Why does a man’s belief matter, should one take another’s word for it, or shall one examine deeper with more intimate meaning such as St Thomas Aquinas did? With assistance in his question answer format, St. Thomas successfully describes the relationship between man and Christ, and how it is all possible. What is Thomas Aquinas proof in Summa Theologica? How were his questions determined, and how can we use his work in modern day living
Does the Ontological Argument successfully show that God exists? Anselm 's ontological argument is a philosophical argument which aims to prove God 's existence. The ontological argument is an argument for God’s existence based on reason alone. According to this argument, there is no need to go out looking for physical evidence of God’s existence; we can work out that he exists just by thinking about it. (Anon., 2004) Anselm’s argument is a reductio argument, it seeks to demonstrate that a statement is true by showing that an absurd result would follow from its denial.