Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Proof of the existence of god
Thomas Aquinas theory of god's existence
Thomas Aquinas theory of god's existence
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Proof of the existence of god
The existence of God has been an ongoing question that almost everyone has been searching for an answer.Back in the day when the idea of God was the centre of everyones conversation , Philosophers/Scientist began to argue of God’s existence and what God was like.With little knowledge and evidence to study whether God was real or not people came to realize that after years and years there was just not enough to justify either side which is why one should keep an open mind on topics like this.Our minds are still developing and there are such complex things out there that one day we hope to find a definite answer for.There is going to be objections that discuss on why other philosophers don 't believe in the idea of a God. There are still people to this day who are theist , atheist, and agnostic but right now we are going to focus on the philosophers and their pieces that prove that God’s existence is legit and one of the greatest philosophers that will focus on that is St.Thomas Aquinas and other philosophers with the same beliefs.
The existence of God is obviously the very first argument that arises, if we still yet have not found any evidence to justify the existence of God, why do people still believe there is one? Bertrand Russell(1872-1970) was a famous philosopher who argued back to this question by applying the Burden of proof using the teapot analogy. To sum it up, the teapot analogy is that there is a teapot somewhere out there in space that causes gravity. The teapot is “To small to be seen, to small to have gravity of its own,older than the universe itself, is responsible for the existence of gravity”(Philosophical content 5). When you apply this to the concept of God’s existence it ends up being the exact same ide...
... middle of paper ...
...thing that could possibly not be there,which Pascal Wager comes in defence and talks about the benefits there are in living life as if he did exist vs if he didn 't. Then God’s ability of not being able to deal with the existence of evil in the world comes into question which is supported by him giving us the free will and moral choice.Lastly they argue the idea that everything has an exact cause and if that exact cause hasn 't been identified yet, its probably because it caused itself .Which is opposed by the Cosmological argument where everything summed up to God being that creator.God created the universe and everything in it for a reason. We rely on one another, we learn from mistakes, we grow and advance in so many ways.Every single person and thing made on this earth was put there for a reason so there is no way the universe could have just created itself.
McCloskey begins by addressing the cosmological argument. He proposes that the existence of the world itself does not give reason to believe in a necessarily existing being. McCloskey believes there is a lack of evidence to show the world had a cause and that God was that cause. However, Evans and Manis suggest there are beings in this world that are unaware of how they came to exist. These beings are often contingent on another being. Th...
One of the most argued topics throughout human history is whether or not God exists. It is argued frequently because there are several different reasonings and sub arguments in this main argument. People who believe God exists argue how God acts and whether there is one or several. People who do not believe God exists argue how the universe became into existence or if it has just always existed. In this paper, I will describe Craig's argument for the existence of God and defend Craig's argument.
Whether god exists or not has been in discussion for thousands of years, and an important discussion. Whether it is rational to believe in god or not is another story, like believing in god itself, this topic has brought many discussions. It is one thing to discuss whether god is real or not and it is a complete other to discuss whether it is rational to believe in god or not. I believe that while there may not be any convincing evidence or arguments that God does exist, I do still believe that it is still rational to believe that god does exist. I think this because, believing in God is not simply just believing that he exists, but believing that it can bring good to our lives, we otherwise would not have. It teaches us to have a moral responsibility not only to others, but ourselves. It is obvious that many people do believe in god, but many of us choose to do so for reasons other than just believing in God. I do believe that just because there is no evidence, that does not mean God doesn’t exist. Like I said, God brings more to our lives than just a belief, but an ability to achieve a better one. And even if God is just an imaginary figure, he is an imaginary figure that brings hope and goodness to our lives, which we can never discount.
In this paper, I will be discussing Pascal’s Wager. What I first plan to do in this paper is explain the argument of Pascal’s Wager. Next I will explain how Pascal tries to convince non-theists why they should believe in God. I will then explain two criticisms in response to Pascal’s argument. Finally, I will discuss whether or not these criticisms show Pascal’s reasoning to be untenable.
The Proof of the Existence of God There are many arguments that try to prove the existence of God. In this essay I will look at the ontological argument, the cosmological. argument, empirical arguments such as the avoidance of error and the argument from the design of the. There are many criticisms of each of these that would say the existence of God can’t be proven that are perhaps.
There are many theories to why a God might exist, but the Ontological argument tells us that a God is a necessary truth based on the self-contradictory or denying the existence of God. They use the proposition of the concept of God to argue the implied existence of God. This is to suppose that God is by definition the greatest thing imaginable and that to imagine something greater which can also exist is impossible. They use the general rule of positive and negative existential claims to try and prove the existence of God. they do this in a number of ways, with the classic version of the ontological argument being the most recognized, the reductio ad absurdum ("reduction of absurdity") of the ontological argument and the modal versions of the argument. It explains that nothing can exist in the imagination alone, it must also exist in reality to truly exist, and they have decided that there has to be such a being that exists in the imagination and in reality that noting greater can exist. I do not find this argument to be true in stating the fact that God must exist in reality, al...
According to agnostics, there is absolutely no proof of a God and thus, “God” could actually be an existence fabricated from myths. In addition, it is believed that the universe is both ethereal and uncaused by any higher power; it is simply “just there”. Take the Big Bang Theory for example, agnostics claim the universe essentially sprang into existence all on its own and life is merely a series of random processes. Likewise, one could easily ask the question, if God created the universe then who created God? However, some may argue that deism is the most accurate worldview since it is most rationally correct. Many scientists today are actually discovering reasons to believe a God does exist but does not intervene in our daily lives. Philosopher, Antony Flew, was known for being a famous atheist that later took on the deist approach because of how modern science is beginning to “prove” the existence of a creator. Both agnostics and deists agree that there are explanations for mundane happenings and mystical occurrences are merely coincidental. Similarly, if there is a supposedly good God, why is there so much evil and suffering in the world? Why does he not
of the arguments in favor of God, or a so-called "higher power" are based on
Truth, what is truth? This question itself has a thousand answers, no person can ever be sure of what truth is rather, truth can be justified, it can checked for reliability with strong evidences and logic. If the evidence proves to be accurate then it can be established that a certain answer is the truth. However, have we ever tried to think about what intrigues us to seek the truth? To think about a question and set foot firmly on the path of knowledge. Definitely it has! That was the very cause itself which is why this world has witnessed some of the greatest philosophers like Aristotle, Plato and Socrates etc. along with the school of thought. The ability to think and reason is one of the greatest ability humans have, it is what distinguishes us from the animals. It is what gives us free will, the ability to control our own outcomes. However, it is that ability to ‘think’ itself which has caused men to rebel with the myths and statements established about the unseen and natural forces since the beginning of time. It gave rise to questions such as: Do aliens exist? Is there a world of the unseen? Life after Death and the most popular question since the beginning of times, Does God exists? And the answer is ‘yes’. Here is how I will justify my stance.
The statement "God exists" is not proveable, or unfalsifiable. We cannot say whether it is true or false. This is because God is not a 'fact that can be observed and subjected to testing. People do not see God i...
The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God The ontological argument is an a priori argument. The arguments attempt to prove God's existence from the meaning of the word God. The ontological argument was introduced by Anselm of Canterbury in his book Proslogion. Anselm's classical argument was based on two principals and the two most involved in this is St Anselm of Canterbury as previously mentioned and Rene Descartes.
Modern debates over religion, more specifically God, focus primarily on whether or not sufficient evidence exists to either prove or disprove the existence of a God. Disbelievers such as biologist Richard Hawkins tend to point to the indisputable facts of evolution and the abundance of scientific evidence which seem to contradict many aspects of religion. Conversely, believers such as Dr. A. E. Wilder-Smith describe the controversial aspects of science, and how the only possible solution to everything is a supreme being. However, mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal refused to make either type of argument; he believed that it was impossible to determine God’s existence for certainty through reason. Instead, he suggested that rational individuals should wager as though God does indeed exist, because doing so offers these individuals everything to gain, and nothing to lose. Unfortunately, Pascal’s Wager contains numerous fallacies, and in-depth analysis of each one of his arguments proves that Pascal’s Wager is incorrect.
God can be defined as a being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions (1). There are many people that do not believe in any religion. People who do not believe in a religion have no reason for believing in a God. People who do not believe in a God and argue against the existence of God are proving something that is completely false. There is a God for numerous reasons.
A fascination of the human race is discovering how the universe, everyone, and everything came into being. Many scientist and theologians have studied this topic for centuries and looking back at some of the earlier arguments will show key insights in proving Gods existence. One of the best sources we have on the subject of Gods existence in the catholic theologian Saint Thomas Aquinas.
There are three philosophical positions that argue on the existence of God, whether He really exist or not; the Theism, Atheism and Agnosticism.