Understanding Christianity from an Aristotelian point of view - Essay Example

Analytical essay Summa theologica represents the works of Thomas Aquinas in his quest to understanding Christianity from an Aristotelian point of view. Summa theologica gets made up of three parts (Aquinas & Edward 5). The first explains the existence and nature of God and the planet he created. The second deals with human activity and ethics. The third part explains Christ and the sacraments (Brian 22). Neo-Platonism refers to the term associated with the teachings of Plato and the Platonists. It is vital to note that though it bases its arguments on the teachings of Plato, it is quite different from what Plato wrote (Remes 22). Plotinus and his apprentice Porphyry get credited as the founders of Neo-Platonism. This paper will compare and contrast the characterization of God in the summa theologica and the neo-Platonist view. Both the summa theologica and neo-Platonism account for the existence of a superior being or God. In the summa theological, Aquinas advances arguments that seek to establish and prove God’s existence (Brian 22). Aquinas states that there is a God simply because the world itself needs him as an explanation. The first part of the summa theologica concludes by Aquinas quipping that God cannot fail to exist. Aquinas proposes that the world cannot function with such efficiency without a grand architect who is God (Edward & Aquinas 39). The smoothness with which the world functions cannot be created by chance but must be the product of God’s work. Aquinas in his first three arguments aims at explaining the existence of God by accounting for change in the physical world, the presence of the physical world, and existence in itself.Neo-Platonism also accepts the existence of the one who is infinite (Albert 30). The one gets painted as the source of life and the sole cause of the only real existence. The one is the source of all life. The one is beyond all forms of being. The one gets portrayed as the most reality and a source of less real things. The one is a divine power that is complete and self sufficient (Remes 132). The summa theologica and neo-Platonism acknowledge the existence of a superior being who is all knowing. The summa theological derives its characterization of God from an Aristotelian point of view (Brian 103). The neo-platonic conception of the one gets derived from Plato’s teachings. The summa theologica rejects the idea of the neo-Platonists that knowledge of the Supreme Being gets based on ideas and forms that exist in the mind (Aquinas & Edward 93). Aquinas disputes Plato’s view that knowledge gets derived from the mind alone. He suggests that knowledge gets derived from the soul which has intellect in its composition. He argues against Plato’s view by suggesting that if knowledge only got derived from the mind alone, then the soul would be of no use to the body. Aquinas affirms the need for the body in the acquisition of knowledge and rejects the theory of innate ideas forwarded by the Platonists (Brian 74). Neo-Platonists argue that the knowledge of the one gets contemplated by the mind, which generates ideas and forms (Remes 100). By generation of ideas and forms, the knowledge about the one gets divided and multiplied. The knowledge about the one gets transcended into the physical world through the world soul. The world soul according to the neo-Platonists is separate from the individual human souls (Albert 145). Summa theologicadiffers with neo-platonic concepts on the basis of how the knowledge of God gets inferred to human beings. Both the summa theologica and the neo-platonic concepts on the characterization of God agree that the mind assists in the acquisition of knowledge. The mind acquires knowledge about God by creating images. Aquinas refers to these images as ‘phantasms’ in the summa theologica (Aquinas & Edward 123). Aquinas argues that the mental images about God get based on sensual experience, and this creates universal ideas and principles. According to Aquinas, the passive part of knowledge gets accounted for by sensual experience (Brian 84). The active part of knowledge gets provided for by the mind. The neo-Platonist movement also agrees to the idea of the mind creating ideas and forms when the mind contemplates about the one. According to the neo-Platonists, the perfect power of the one flows spontaneously to the mind of humans (Remes 142). The mind receives a perfect image of the one through which it contemplates its ideas and forms. The mind transforms this image into the material world where they become perceived. The summa theologica and the neo-Platonistsdiffer on the topic of human happiness. The neo-Platonists believe that human happiness and perfection are achievable in this world (Albert 188). They believe that human beings can attain perfection and happiness in this world without waiting for the afterlife. The essence of human happiness and perfection derives from philosophical contemplation (Remes 101). Neo-Platonists do not believe in the existence of evil but rather view it as the absence of good. They compare evil to darkness and view it as the absence of light (Remes 154). Their basic view is that things are good as long as they are existent. Things are evil dependent on their imperfection. Evil things are only existent as they lack the good that they should otherwise have. According to Aquinas, happiness is inseparable with divine contemplation (Aquinas & Edward 185). Divine essence is vital for humans to achieve happiness. Nothing can bring happiness to a human being other than divine essence. Aquinas contemplates that the goal of human life is happiness. He postulates that every human being is on the way to completely achieve their potential (Brian 111). The actualization and realization of human’s potential is what makes up happiness. The potential of human beings gets achieved through understanding their divine essence. According to Aquinas, no material or worldly good can bring happiness. The thing that catapults humans to happiness is the will. The will helps humans to achieve happiness through the divine will (Aquinas & Edward 132). Aquinas states that human happiness is only possible in the afterlife where God is the pure being and actual. It is the will and works of God that can determine the happiness of humans. The summa theologica and the neo-Platonists differ on the actualization of happiness. The neo-Platonists believe that happiness can become achieved in the current world. The summa theologica postulates that happiness only becomes actualized in the afterlife. Both the summa theologica and neo-Platonists postulate that all forms of life return to the source who is God. The neo-Platonists believe that all things result from the one and it is only right that all these things return to the one (Remes 18). They state that when things return to the one, all their consciousness gets wiped off them, and they return in a blank state. All the things humans know about themselves get lost when they are returning to the one (Albert 50). It can get expanded that neo-Platonists view that the soul is immortal and that humans are not part of it but rather of the material realm. Likewise, the summa theologica ascribes to the fact that all lives return to God upon death. Aquinas postulates in the second part of the summa that there is an afterlife where human beings can attain actualization and happiness. According to Aquinas, the process of becoming divine naturally leads to God, and this is possible only in the afterlife (Aquinas & Edward 64). The summa and neo-Platonism acknowledge the existence of intermediate forms that connect humans and God. Neo-Platonic philosophers ascribed to the existence of intermediate angels and demons, gods, and other beings as between the one and humanity (Remes 66). These intermediate forms provided channels for communication between the one and humanity. Aquinas, in the last part of the summa, acknowledges the existence of Christ who mediates between God and humanity (Albert 149). Conclusion The summa theologica and neo-platonism provide views on Christianity and the existence of God. The summa got written by Thomas Aquinas who intends to explain Christianity basing on the thinking of Aristotle. Neo-Platonism is a doctrine that got based on the teachings of Plato, and became advanced by Plotinus. The summa and neo-Platonism acknowledge the existence of God who gets portrayed as eternal in both doctrines.The differences between the two doctrines get presented by the angles at which they got advanced. The differences majorly emanate from the fact that Aquinas employs Aristotelian school of thought in his quest to discover Christianity and explaining the existence of God. Neo-Platonism greatly borrows from the teachings of Plato in explaining the existence of the one. The two different schools of thought form the basis in comparing and contrasting the characterization of God in both the summa and neo-Platonism. Works Cited Read More