The Cause-Effect Relationship in Proving Gods Existence - Coursework Example

The Cause-Effect Relationship in Proving God’s Existence Thomas Aquinas was a religious monk who made a great impact in philosophy and theology. Aquinas, unlike other philosophers, was strictly linked to religion, and this made it possible for Aquinas to postulate a philosophical basis on which God’s existence may be proved. Aquinas’ debate on God’s existence opened a new front in philosophy where philosophers dealt with the problem of faith and reality, and whether the two could be used to understand the phenomenon of God. While his argument that God’s existence was self-evident raised a debate in philosophy, Aquinas used philosophical doctrines on how God’s existence could be deduced from nature; a supreme being and a cause above other causes. In Summa Theologiae, Aquinas makes an emphatic philosophical analysis to prove that God exists, and his existence can be deduced from what is around, suggesting that God's existence is self-evident and does not require any emphatic proofs. Therefore, from Aquinas’s philosophical arguments in Summa Theologia, the truth that cannot be known from existence can be known from a cause-effect relationship in that judging from what can be perceived, there has to be a higher order that causes what can be experienced in reality. The paper investigates Aquinas attempt to construct what is not known through that which is known in a cause-effect relationship to understand the existence of God. Aquinas borrows his main arguments from the Ontological argument of St. Anselm, who argued that God is the end beyond which nothing else can be conceived to exist. As such, God being the greatest being has to exist, for existence is much higher than non-existence. Consequently, Aquinas borrowed heavily from the existence of truth to explain that God exists. If the truth exists, then God being the absolute truth itself has to exist. The truth is self-evident in that there has to be that which is true and that which is false, suggesting that an absolute truth has to exist. Therefore, God exists in reality and is the direct cause of the truth, which can only be attributed to him. Aquinas refers to John 14:6, which states that “Am the truth the way and life.” As such, though we may not know God, it is clear that the truth exists. The truth emanates from an absolute truth much higher than itself, which is a proof that God exists in reality. Aquinas argues that every whole is greater than its parts. As such, everything that exists is a part of some whole at which everything has to intersect to make whole. The thing that exists so that nothing greater can exist has to be the cause of every part that emanates from the whole, which can be experienced in reality. In other words, each part as seen is a reflection of existence of something greater and whole beyond which nothing else can be thought. This suggests that there has to be the cause-effect relationship in which every part is caused to be by that which is greater than the part itself. In fact, as Aquinas further elaborates in objection 2, that which exists mentally and physically has to be higher than that which exists only mentally. The cause is reflected physically by that which exists. Through this cause and effect relationship, it is viable to conclude that God exists in the mind, and thus, he exists in reality. Aquinas uses this argument to explain that God‘s existence is self-evident through the existence of the parts of a whole system that are experienced physically. Aquinas argument on moving from potentiality to actuality as a cause-effect relationship suggests that a power exists, greater than what happens and what is experienced. Everything in the world is in a state of motion and change. As such, things have to change from one state to another; from potentiality towards attaining actuality. From Newton’s laws of motion, things will remain unchanged unless acted by an external force that triggers the change. Aquinas’ argument is that behind every motion and every change in the world as evidenced in physical things, there is a greater power from which all the forces of change emanate. Aquinas observed that the cause of such changes cannot be said to be infinite, but every change has to emanate from a central power, by itself perfect and actualized. Aquinas in his argument reiterates the fact that one does not need to Know God or have faith in God, a priori, but has only to reflect about the changes in the universe to understand and know God. The first cause of the perceived changes cannot be caused as it has already attained actuality. Consequently, everything else strives to achieve this actuality, which explains the concept of motion and change in physical things. The perfect actuality is thus the cause of everything else, which exists as it is, and to which everything else seems to pay allegiance. This argument is similar to Aquinas’ argument about everything being part of the whole; the whole exercises command over all parts as experienced physically. All the same, Aquinas use of cause and effect relationship in proving the existence of God falls into a dilemma when confronted with the problem of evil. If God exists and as observed, is the uncaused cause, does God cause evil? As the truth exists, evil does exist in reality. In objection 3, the dilemma is that considering that God is truth, and an absolute good, then evil cannot be said to be related to God, though it does exist in reality. Aquinas objects that God may permit evil to emanate from something good in that God being the absolute good can have nothing to do with evil. This raises a dilemma in that, in the cause and effect relationship, evil has to have its absolute cause as everything else. To answer this dilemma, Aquinas reiterated the fact that it might not be possible to understand the explanation of creation from the creation itself. This made Aquinas treat the problem of evil in more detail in two books, The problem of evil, which explains the philosophical dilemma of evil, considering that it cannot be attributed to the cause and effect relationship. From Aquinas’ arguments, the cause and effect relationship is the major premise that explains and supports the existence of that which cannot be explained in reality. In other words, the thing will bear evidence of that which caused it, and by understanding that which is experienced, it is possible to figure out its cause in a greater detail. Understanding God’s existence to Aquinas, unlike in theology was not a matter of faith, but a philosophical issue, which could be proved through systematic inquiry. As such, the cause and effect relationship is a significant evidence to prove the existence of God. However, the problem of evil was a major challenge to Aquinas forcing him to address two whole books in addressing the issue, mainly in debunking it from cause and effect relationship similar to other things that exist in reality. Work used Introduction to Philosophy: Summa Theologiae (Course material) Read More