Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Aquinas would likely not have understood how they could overlook all the "evidence" of God's handiwork all around them, and how they could discount the possibility that the knowledge they were acquiring came through their senses, but that the understanding of that knowledge came from the divine abilities given to them by God. Science and religion generally do not mix, although there are some who feel that both have a basis in truth and that both are correct - at least in part. While some scientists believe in God and some religious individuals believe in evolution, it is generally an either/or proposition, not one where both are possible or even acceptable. Aquinas would not have been interested in changing his philosophy and psychology about life and about God in order to meet the requirements of science. He was very devout, and remained that way throughout his life (Copleston, 1991). While scientists may not agree with his beliefs, there is a certain amount of respect that must be given to someone who holds so strongly to his beliefs in the face of information...
Conversely, there is no scientific "evidence" that will cause a true believer in God to renounce that belief. What people see as evidence of science or of the Divine varies from person to person, and comes back to the nature of knowledge and the senses of the body. How a person perceives something with the senses, and how that person accepts or rejects what his or her senses tell him or her, can shape that person's viewpoints on this life and the potential for the next.
References
Copleston, F. (1991). Aquinas: An introduction to the life and work of the great medieval thinker. New York: Penguin Books.
Paterson, C. & Pugh, M.S. (eds.). (2006). Analytical Thomism: Traditions in dialogue. New York: Ashgate.
Even if they may not have the same force as divine law, the laws should not contradict the laws of heaven. This binding injunction to the people to obey also applies to rulers -- monarchs should not contradict the will of the divine, and endeavor to create a state that mirrors that of God. For example, Aquinas prohibited usury, or charging money at interest given Christ's condemnation of money
The way in which this argument is employed differently in classical Islamic philosophy is actually quite interesting. We might compare Aquinas' argument here with Avicenna's use of Al-Farabi's concept of the "active intellect." Aquinas' prime mover argument is fundamentally Aristotelian, and thus Avicenna and al-Farabi were both familiar with the Aristotelean notion that God as Prime Mover could be logically deduced from the motion of planets and stars. For Avicenna,
Aquinas / Machiavelli Edit Comparing Aquinas and Machiavelli Aquinas and Machiavelli both had an important position in the study of historical development of Western political theory. They were Italian giants of medieval philosophy and politics. One of their common arguments is that nature is the basis of politics, including the nature of human beings and the nature of nations. Some may argue that in the totality of comparison that the work of
160). Furthermore, Aquinas considers all people as being creations of God and parts of a whole that God represents. God's perfection has been passed on to its creations and thus all humans are perfect in their nature. Aquinas is obsessed with demonstrating the existence of God and this can be seen in most of his writings. F.C. Copleston elucidates the reason for this through the fact that "in arguing for
It is feasible, perhaps, that someone could hold the principle that he should always act rationally but also believe that this rationality should act towards maximizing their individual base pleasures. Clearly, this could be carried out at the expense of other rational beings. This would violate Kant's universal laws of morality because it would reject the elevated nature of humanity in general. At the same time, if this person
The Greeks believe that the soul is an essential part of the body since it gives it life. The soul thinks, feels, and chooses[footnoteRef:1]. The interaction between the body and soul influences one another giving rise to the concept of dualism. They also view the soul as a simple form without any parts. Plato postulated that the soul is separated from the body and while the body degenerates, the soul