How St. Thomas Aquinas' Second Way for Proving the Existence of God Works (Aquinas 101)
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 07. 2024
- ⭐️ Donate $5 today to help keep these videos FREE for everyone!
You can pay it forward for the next viewer: go.thomisticinstitute.org/don...
How do we know that God exists? Can we know him by reason alone? In this episode of Aquinas 101: How St. Thomas Aquinas' Second Way for Proving the Existence of God Works, join Fr. Cajetan Cuddy, O.P., a Dominican friar from the Province of St. Joseph, as he presents how St. Thomas Aquinas' Second Way for proving the existence of God works.
This video is an excerpt from Lesson 4: How St. Thomas Aquinas' Second Way for Proving the Existence of God Works (Aquinas 101) by Fr. Cajetan Cuddy, O.P. To explore the complete module, including supplemental readings and lectures, click here: aquinas101.thomisticinstitute...
For readings, podcasts, and more videos like this, go to www.Aquinas101.com. While you’re there, be sure to sign up for one of our free video courses on Aquinas. And don’t forget to like and share with your friends, because it matters what you think!
Subscribe to our channel here:
czcams.com/users/TheThomisti...
--
Aquinas 101 is a project of the Thomistic Institute that seeks to promote Catholic truth through short, engaging video lessons. You can browse earlier videos at your own pace or enroll in one of our Aquinas 101 email courses on St. Thomas Aquinas and his masterwork, the Summa Theologiae. In these courses, you'll learn from expert scientists, philosophers, and theologians-including Dominican friars from the Province of St. Joseph.
Enroll in Aquinas 101 to receive the latest videos, readings, and podcasts in your email inbox each week.
Sign up here: aquinas101.thomisticinstitute...
Help us film Aquinas 101!
Donate here: go.thomisticinstitute.org/don...
Want to represent the Thomistic Institute on your campus? Check out our online store!
Explore here: go.thomisticinstitute.org/sto...
Stay connected on social media:
/ thomisticinstitute
/ thomisticinstitute
/ thomisticinst
Visit us at: thomisticinstitute.org/
Dominican Friars: dominicanfriars.org/
#Aquinas101 #ThomisticInstitute #ThomasAquinas #Catholic
To view the rest of the videos in this new series, click on this link! → czcams.com/video/pLWPfwl_Kj4/video.html
Here is a philosophical critique of Aquinas' Second Way as presented in the video:
- The argument relies on the key premise that nothing can be the cause of itself or explain its own existence. But this principle is asserted without justification.
- It is questionable why God gets an exception to this rule. If we grant things can't cause themselves, what caused God? The argument is circular here.
- Even if valid, the leap from an unmoved first efficient cause to the Christian theological conception of God is unjustified. This cause could be something more impersonal.
- Infinite causal regresses are dismissed as impossible but there are models of eternal cosmic causality not requiring a first cause that are left unaddressed.
- The Argument illicitly treats existence as a predicate that requires explanation. But "exists" may not be a coherent predicate in this way according to Kant's critique.
- Appealing to intuition to justify key premises is not sufficient. Rigorous deductive proof of the key premises is required to make the argument philosophically sound.
In summary, Aquinas' Second Way relies on disputable metaphysical assumptions left unjustified and does not conclusively prove the existence of the Christian God conceptually. Reasonable objections remain that are unaddressed by the video's presenter.
Here is a symbolic logic formulation of Aquinas' Second Way:
1. ∀x(~Cxx → ∃y(Cyx & ~Cyy))
For all x, if x is not causally self-explanatory, then there exists some y, such that y caused x and y is not self-caused.
1. ~∃x(Cxx)
There does not exist any x that is self-caused.
1. ∴ ∃y(Uy & ∀x(Cxy))
Therefore, there exists an uncaused cause y, such that for all x, y causes x.
Problems:
- Premise 1 assumes causal chains cannot be infinite or circular, which is unjustified.
- Premise 2 asserts without justification that nothing can be self-explanatory.
- The conclusion invalidly equates this uncaused cause with the God concept.
The symbolic logic helps illustrate the lack of justification for key premises, the impermissible deductive leap, and failure to address objections like infinite causal chains. Thus, the argument is unsound.
6th proof for God's existence: There is the calm, smooth, smoldering voice of Fr. Cajetan Cuddy, therefore God exists.
So true.
I absolutely love your golden radio voice Fr. Cuddy, it made it a pleasure to follow along in the video.
Thanks for illuminating us all, Thomistic Institute.
It's our pleasure! Thanks for taking the time to watch and comment, and may the Lord bless you!
heartily second this!
Ha, I was thinking the exact same!
“Thinking is not an easy activity…”
This is so relatable
I've just downloaded all your videos, listening to all your talks everyday makes me more intelligent.
How can I do the same?
I have been waiting for this video. The second way is my go-to argument for God's existence. To me, it is the most airtight of all the other arguments.
Thanks so much for your feedback -- this is wonderful to hear! Thanks for watching, and may the Lord bless you!
@@ThomisticInstitute Bless you too. When is part 2 coming?
You think more airtight then the First Way? (St. Thomas himself says the First is the most manifest.) Interested to hear your takes on this.
@@blessedvirginmaryisqueen8448 I agree It's the most manifest but I have noticed in my interactions that atheists concede the second quicker than the first. Perhaps they understand sufficient causality better.
@@Lerian_V I see. Interestingly enough, the 5th Way, from Design, though perfectly valid is, to a trained philosopher, the weakest of the 5, while, in my experience, it is usually the easiest to explain and understand for the average person.
God bless you all! Thank you!
It's our joy! Thanks for taking the time to watch and comment, and may the Lord bless you!
Thanks lads, keep up the excellent work!
Our pleasure! Thanks for taking the time to watch and comment, and may the Lord bless you!
Wow. His voice!
love these videos. Thanks for posting.
We're so glad to hear it! Thanks for taking the time to watch and comment, and may the Lord bless you!
Fascinating. May God Bless you all for this!
Our pleasure! Thanks for taking the time to watch and comment. May the Lord bless you!
This is an excellent presentation, I loved it.
We're glad to hear it! Thanks for taking the time to watch and comment. May the Lord bless you!
Brillant and clear as always cant wait to see how you treat infinity in the next one. The key to the argument.
Sneak peek: Fr. James Brent, O.P. will be presenting the third way, so definitely stay tuned! Thanks so much for your continued support, and may the Lord bless you!
@@ThomisticInstitute God bless you
you wonder what it is to sense, and indeed perceive extra-sensorial, like a wrapper sometimes, like a wall you'd glimpse and push back, to realize itd been a screen from someone else. connectedness, spritual focus and in accumen therin. probably latin. the process of thought until it trips you out. it most splendidly can do that. dont think theres a single one among you who dont think Thomas' cool. its not sacrilege, or/and drifty dream, its beautiful. looking forward to you continuing this second.
Fr. Cuddy's voice sounds so much like Fr. Chad Ripperger's voice...it's uncanny
What a coincidence! Thanks for taking the time to watch and comment -- may the Lord bless you!
Great video, would like to see one on just war theory.
Thanks so much for watching and for your feedback -- we'll keep it in mind! May the Lord bless you!
Me gusta la 1era vía. Dios es el porque supremo. La primera causa. Dios en su inmensidad en su primer pensamiento decidió todo y todos nos debemos a esa decisión. Decisión de amor
More TRINITY videos plz
We have a video in the queue about the Trinity and the Mass, so stay tuned! May the Lord bless you!
Well, the Bible says God is Love, Love LOVE, Love others, Love Your Self, Love Enemies, and of Faith, Hope, & Love, Love is Eternal...
Without Love, we are just noise - so without God we are just noise & dust ! So my proof of God existing are parents loving & raising their children to healthy adults ! :-) Every Living person is PROOF of Love for Life, Earth, & People made in God's image.
Where there is God, there is Love. Every Loving coupled gathered together in His Name is Blessed by the Holy Spirit of Truth !
Sounds a lot like St. Thomas' 4th Way (the argument from Goodness)!
The constant repetition is not necessary. We got that Aquinas reasoned from what we can see and experience to what we cannot directly see and experience after the 483rd time it was repeated. Sorry for the snark, but the editor should have caught that and revised this presentation.
Pls.forgive me about this question?....
What is saint thomas cause of death ...?
Ull c god of this earth
But he's Wang from Dr.Strange! 😂❤
Sorry not everyone has perfect human senses but some may have supernatural senses and as they link to God as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit I think it can be infinite, because supernatural is infinite and a human lifespan is a cycle based on conceiving our own children. Always strive and be on the good path of God as God is always good all the time, even in rightful anger.
Narrate books!
The problem I have with purporting that STAq legitimately allows reason to be used to prove the existence of God is 1) the complexity of STAq's 5 ways, at all, and 2) not knowing all the refutation attempts. How can I accept STAq's theory without seeing the failure of ALL refutations? It all seems so loosey goosey - where do we hit bone? There are a lot of CZcamsrs who claim to refute STAq.
Any of those CZcamsrs who claim to "refute" Aquinas ever end up taking up vast sections of The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy yet, like Aquinas does? Or are the ones you're watching anything like the ones I've watched that don't even sort of understand the subject, but then "refute" Aquinas?
find the refuters and ask if there making fair arguments if they are finding people that are refuting the refuters are they making fair arguments? eventually, it will hit an absurd argument barrier and you'll know if it's refuted.
but this is why I hesitate to prove anything through logic alone, I find the 32 numbers in physics more compelling, they're are 32 numbers that if one decimal off the universe would not exist and can only be explained by a purposeful design or multiple universes but multiverse theory takes too many logical leaps to work.
In another life, Father Catejan would have become very wealthy reading audiobooks and singing babies to sleep.
Well, causality is NOT something you can sense - only infer...
I'm sorry, but this video was a waste of time. Too much repetition in it, saying at least 3 times St. Thomas starts with empirical evidence. Would have been better to make progress instead of repeating so many times.
Given the realities of bias, low statistical power, and a small number of true hypotheses, Ioannidis concludes that the majority of studies in a variety of scientific fields are likely to report results that are false. Science is not the only way to discover absolute truth, and even then science itself does not say it does, it just helps us understand what we already know but it could change to fit another theory better. You cannot have natural evidence for God since he is above the natural world but I believe the case for Christ is a good way of knowing God truly existing
Aquinas admitted he could not prove that his chosen god existed before he wrote his thesis proving (indirectly) that his chosen god existed.
This is just an appeal to ignorance. Just because we dont know the answer, doesnt mean it is god.
Who here knows where does wind come from?
Does wind come from god?
Or does wind come a difference in air preasure? This just happens.
Sounds like you didn’t understand the argument at all, that’s a complete straw man.
study more.
You don't understand the argument. Everything in the universe is made up of matter or energy. Matter and energy cannot come from nothing. Therefore, the universe could not have come from nothing. The natural universe must have been created, because it cannot break the natural rules it is bound too.