The Existence of God and the Philosophy of Aristotle - Essay Example

Thomas Aquinas Question 5: The General Framework of Good Introduction Thomas Aquinas was influenced by the philosophical concepts of Aristotle, as he approached the facts of life, while relating it with the divine power and characteristics. However, there are major differences in the approach of philosophical reasoning towards various attributes of the human being. For example, while Thomas agrees with Aristotle about happiness being the ultimate goal of human life and everything is done towards meeting this attribute of “goodness”, Aristotle describes good life in teleological and not in eschatological terms believing that human beings are happy when they orient themselves towards good, but nobody can meet happiness in a ace to face situation. On the other hand, Thomas believes that ultimate happiness comes from the divine and the seekers may one day contemplate God in one form or the other. According to Aristotle, knowing God is almost impossible, as there is no creature on this earth, which can resemble him. However, Thomas argues that God can be known through his essence and human beings can achieve this knowledge through the intellectual vision of God, which satisfies the desire of the seeker. Aquinas describes this state of being as true happiness. He differs from secular perspectives of Aristotle, as Thomas acknowledges that there cannot be any true happiness without any relation to God, as the concepts of happiness has its origin and final goal in God. Question 5: general framework of goodness According to the philosopher, saint Thomas, the goodness is termed as transcendental, as it encompass all the categories, like quantity, quality and substance, which are associated to goodness as good quality, good substance and so on. However, the philosopher and saint, Aquinas goes further to define the moral goodness in this question, which he believes is governed by the moral actions. While describing moral goodness, Aquinas relates it to virtuous goodness, pleasant and useful goodness. Question 5 mainly investigates the three points. First, it explores the relation of goodness with ‘being’. Second, the relation of goodness with the ultimate end and third, the order in goodness, as being the way it is divided. According to Summa theology, the Aquinas Question 5 relates to general goodness. The question mainly deals with the idea and thought regarding goodness and our being. Which has the priority in our thought process? Is there any cause related to goodness and is this attribute seen in species, mode or order? How does goodness relate to pleasantness, virtues and usefulness? The following paragraphs try to go into the depth, on the issues raised in this question. Goodness and being In essence, goodness and being are the same; Aquinas suggests that goodness is the ultimate desire of all. However, goodness does have an aspect of desirableness, while the state of being may not have this attribute. Thinkers like Boethius present a different view of goodness as it differs from being. His counter argument is because there may be perception of certain things in nature to be good, but they may not be so actually. Thomas puts his arguments against this objection by saying that the difference lies in our perception and thought process, when we see goodness and being as different from each other, although they are same. Goodness defines ultimate perfection. Therefore, all goodness virtues should be perfect and those that are not perfect are not good. Hence, the difference of goodness and ‘being’ is only a state of mind. Arguing with the objection raised by De Causis, Thomas Aquinas believes goodness can take a form of being as absolute goodness is another form of complete actuality. However, goodness can be measured and quantified in terms of more or less, while ‘being’ has no such parameters. Arguing against this, Aquinas says that goodness can be termed as more or less, only after adding ‘actuality’ to a being, like virtue or knowledge. (Knight) In idea, which is prior, goodness or ‘being’? Aquinas agrees that ‘being’ is prior to goodness in idea, as anything created first is the ‘being’. The conception in mind and intellect will think of ‘being’ before thinking of goodness. Therefore ‘being’ becomes the object of intellect that can be defined intelligently. Arguing further on the state of ‘being’, the desirable perceptions like wisdom and life require the presence of ‘being’ in mind. Since goodness is related to ultimate desire, nothing is desirable without ‘being’. Hence, both go together, while ‘being’ can come prior to goodness in mind, both are related and interdependent. Going further on the difference of goodness and ‘being’, in the realm of an idea, Cajetan believes that desirableness presupposes the idea of goodness and thus, does not constitute the goodness. However, according to the philosophy of Aquinas, the idea of goodness is in the perfection, which is the basis for desirableness. (Knight) Is being and good the same? ‘Being’ has relation with nature in terms of quantity, substance and quality, while goodness only adds one more virtue, called desirability, to it, which is also an important aspect of being. Further, good and ‘being’ cannot be the same, as everything in this world cannot be good. For example, evil is called bad and this ‘being’ can never be similar to ‘good’. However, in counterargument to this, it can be predicted that every ‘being’ is good, as it is the creation of God only and all his creations are good. The difference in goodness and being is logical, as is found in different live examples. A barren tree is a ‘being’, but it is not good, as it does not possess the virtues of goodness, like bearing fruit and shade. Similarly, a very young horse cannot be a mule as such being is yet to attain perfection and therefore, cannot be same as goodness. (Knight) ‘Beings’ in this world have different characteristics, which are measurable. Some beings are noble, while others can be evil. Further, Aquinas observes that the degree of such virtues varies and therefore it produces the ‘being’ in varying degrees as noblest, nobler or simply noble. However, there is a cause of being as the cause of goodness also, since both are related to the ultimate goal. Therefore the goodness and ‘being’ are implied in the same cause, which is the cause of God. The maximum cause of God is the ultimate perfection and the goodness follows from this cause. Counter arguments As the god’s existence is the basis of all the perfection and the ultimate desire, which lies in the goodness; Aquinas must first define and admit the existence of God in its pure and unquestionable form. Since God exists, the relation between being and goodness becomes clear. The creatures of God can be both good and evil. While nobility is a virtue related to goodness, it is also the creation of God, as he is responsible for creating the human beings and dividing them into the groups of evil and good. Therefore, the existence of God has a direct relationship with goodness. However, St. Thomas acknowledges that ultimate perfection is the final goal of the ‘being’, which ends in the desirability of being with and knowing God. In arguments 1 to 5, St. Thomas believes that the existence of God is the basis of answers to questions and world does require God as tool to explain the order and mode of different ‘beings’ on this earth. Hence, the existence of God is fundamental requirement of achieving the ultimate perfection, desirability and goodness. The existence of God is fundamental to account for the existence of life in this world and any change in it. Virtues like goodness derive only after the existence of world is established, which comes from the notion that God exists. Goodness has the aspect of final cause The idea of an efficient cause comes after the idea of goodness. For example, any ‘will’ can be good or bad, as defined in the terms of goodwill and bad intention. These terms being the virtues of good and evil, imply that cause cannot always be associated with goodness On the other hand, virtue like beauty is another form of goodness, as it has its cause in goodness. (Knight) Essence of goodness comprises in mode, order and species While being has a mode, order and species, goodness may not comprise of these substances. For example, a man can be white, learned, virtuous, and thus good. However, an evil person my not have such characteristics, as he lacks knowledge of God, or denies the existence of God. The evil intentions make such a person as a bad man. Proportionate division of goodness in terms of virtuous, pleasant and usefulness While these attributes may not be equally divided in goodness, the ‘virtuous’ takes the first place followed by the pleasant and finally the useful. (Knight) Conclusion Thomas Aquinas has moved further on the philosophy of Aristotle, who h as been close to the acceptance of God’s existence. St. Thomas fully acknowledges the existence of God, as he describes the ultimate aim of goodness to be the achievement of perfection, which is attributed to God’s creation. Thus, everything that is good is related to the fact that God exists. Work Cited Knight.Kevin, “The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas”, New Advent 1920, Web, 15 November 2014 < http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1005.htm> Read More