philosophy midterm 2

philosophy midterm 2 - Philosophy Test Notes 1 Our world is...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Philosophy Test Notes 1) Our world is a confusing place and it is for this reason that some people say we ought to accept the existence of God based on faith. One thing that could conveniently solve all these problems and make sense of this world is the existence of a god. The main reasons outlined for believing in god is from Aquinas five proofs for the existence of god. He claims we ought to have faith in god firstly because it is the only answer that makes sense. Only god could be the first mover, because everything has to be moved by something. God is needed to be the efficient cause, the primary root of all causes. There has to be something that is a necessity of itself, that has to be god. Further that there has to be something for pe ople to compare to, an ultimate cause and goodness to compare to. Finnaly there must be a intelligent designer of our world because natural things act for an end. Although it is true that god would be a possible solution to these problems, and provide a easy simplistic conclusion. It still makes no sense because it is only one of the mainy possibilities, there is no actual knowledge supporting the existence of god. The only arguments for supporting him are the fact that it would provide an awnsers to these questions. 2) According to Aquinas there has to be a first cause simply because everything is caused by something and the only place this could start is a first cause. Whenever something is moved it is moved by something. For instance when you turn a thermostat you causing the house to get warmer. No matter what happens in the world there has to be a preceding event that caused it, the house cannot heat up by itself. Further, nothing can be the cause of itself for that would mean it existed before it was even created, so the heat of the house couldn’t turn on the heat of the house, because that would mean it was already on. So there has to be an event that happened before to make it occur. So if there has to be an order of causes, and something can’t cause itself, it either has to have a first mover or it has to be infinite. Aquinas then argues that the series can’t be infinite because that would mean there is no
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
first cause, and if there is no first cause there are no causes after that. So if the series doesn’t start somewhere, there is nothing after it meaning there has to be a first mover. For instance if you don’t initially turn up the thermostat, the heater isn’t going to turn on, which isn’t going to distribute heat through though house, which is going to raise the temperature. 3) There is a lot wrong with this argument but the biggest problem, is the fact that either the argument is false, or it is invalid. The reason that it has to be either false or invalid is the fact that the first and second premise both requires a different definition of first mover. In his first premise he claims first cause as in no mover that can be called first, because there will always be prior causes. But then he changes this same definition of first mover for
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 8

philosophy midterm 2 - Philosophy Test Notes 1 Our world is...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online