Aquinas's arguments for God's existence and their philosophical validity

¶ … Aquinas 'prove' the existence of God? Are you satisfied with his arguments?

In the theory of philosophy Aquinas five arguments for the existence of God builds the ground for the existence of upcoming theories. However, due to emerging logical, ethical and philosophical theories more and updated research is coming forward. In relation to the basics of existence of God Aquinas very simply combines the existence of God with the cognitive ability of human being to understand, realize and make judgments about the presence of usual things happening around (Suto). Whereas, Aquinas following theism and being a priest as well can be biased in his arguments about existence of God, there can be perspectives such as atheism and agnosticism continuously targeting the perspective of theism. Moreover, all of the perspectives have their own concepts and tends to build arguments themselves.

Aquinas gave five arguments as a proof for existence of God. These five arguments can be explained as: "(1) Argument of Motion, (2) Argument of Efficient Causes, (3) Argument of Possibility and Necessity, (4) Argument of Gradation of Being, (5) Argument of Design" (Gracyk). Aquinas have given several reasons and possibilities behind his five arguments, furthermore, Miller discusses the two different kinds of possibilites of Aquinas i.e. relative possibilty and absolute possibility. Both of these possibilties are also supporting each other in terms of existance of all the living and non-living things or more relevantly the whole universe (1). Whereas, the first argument tends to describe God as the "first mover" for pushing or involving the whole universe towards the state of constant motion, the second argument explains that God is the first efficient cause of everything that exists today; therefore, everything occurs due to an efficient cause. However, both of these arguments of Aquinas are supporting each other because both of the arguments are discussing motion of anything, which is actually efficient cause or reaction of an action. Since, due to no proof of the very first mover and efficient causer exist therefore existence of God can be considered.

The third argument of Aquinas discusses the possibility and necessity of existence of living beings, moreover, Aquinas very intellectually explains this argument as the reason for existence of something, which may or may be not contingent (Gracyk). Furthermore, by the use of correct existing reasons arguments can be analyzed and further generalized as well (Suto). However, this statement does not necessarily supports Aquinas third argument. On the other hand, science and technology has given reasons for the existence of eveyrthing on this planet, for example, Big-Bang Theory and Theory of Evolution. Moreover, Miller again puts forward an argument, that if existence is considered as property of anything then if something that does not exist would be equal to lacking of property, furthermore, Miller also puts forward that anything in the universe may or may not have properties therefore existence cannot be set as a criteria (4). Whereas, Aquinas argument is self explanatory because it also tends to give the reason behind the existence of God, when there is no existence of any being at all. Therefore, this argument can be accepted to support the existence of God.

Moreover, the fourth argument of Aquinas simply explains that behind any good or bad series or scale of anything is God. However, this argument tends to nullify the concept and theories of ethics because theory of morality explains that everything that has existence has its own set of definitions for good or bad. Therefore, Aquinas this argument cannot be expected without any further proof. Furthermore, the fifth argument of Aquinas very beautifully explains the concept of God behind every design, plan and drawing of everything that exists. However, this argument can be supported by Aquinas third argument, which explains the existence of God behind anything that even does not exist therefore anything that is creating confusion and anything that is designed naturally and anonymously is created by God.

In terms of satisfaction with the arguments of Aquinas, it can be clearly seen in the above arguments that this satisfaction is merely spirituality, cognitive, understanding and sense based. However, Wynn added that theism can be merely falsified because there are some "central problems" with "philosphy of religion." Moreover, for several years athesim was promoted on the ground and basis of theism. However, due to diversified studies and research in the area of philisophy and religion it is considered better to discuss them together because relationship between beliefs about existence of God and personal sensory beliefs can cause baisness (1). Wynn also added that, the view of atheism and theism are exactly the same therefore judging both of the perspectives on the basis of arguments will not be efficient, however, theism has its own natural "life-consistent" belief of religion (3). Keeping in view the examples of reality, facts, findings, theism, atheism and agnosticism every perspective has its own grounds and basis.