Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Aquinas

    Uploaded by

    Michael574
    11 views1 page
    Aquinas objected to Anselm's ontological argument for God's existence in two ways. First, he argued that the human mind does not have an intuitive understanding of God's essence, so Anselm's definition of God as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived" is subjective, not objective. Second, Aquinas stated that as humans, we cannot fully understand God, who is beyond human comprehension. Therefore, we cannot define God in a way that proves God's existence from just the concept of God alone.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Aquinas objected to Anselm's ontological argument for God's existence in two ways. First, he argued that the human mind does not have an intuitive understanding of God's essence, so Anselm's definition of God as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived" is subjective, not objective. Second, Aquinas stated that as humans, we cannot fully understand God, who is beyond human comprehension. Therefore, we cannot define God in a way that proves God's existence from just the concept of God alone.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    11 views1 page

    Aquinas

    Uploaded by

    Michael574
    Aquinas objected to Anselm's ontological argument for God's existence in two ways. First, he argued that the human mind does not have an intuitive understanding of God's essence, so Anselm's definition of God as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived" is subjective, not objective. Second, Aquinas stated that as humans, we cannot fully understand God, who is beyond human comprehension. Therefore, we cannot define God in a way that proves God's existence from just the concept of God alone.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    Aquinas Objections to Anselms Ontological Argument

    St Thomas Aquinas (1225- 1274) was an Italian Priest, Philosopher and Theologian. He is considered one of the most influential theologians to ever have existed; being the father of Thomastic thought and one of the most foremost proponents of natural theology. His teachings (Natural Law) are best known as being used as official doctrine of the Catholic Church. Natural Law was derived partly from Aristotelian teachings and the Bible. Aquinas is remarkable for the way in which he used and developed the legacy of ancient thought, which made his contemporaries regard him as an advanced thinker. [F.C. Copleston Aquinas]

    Aquinas objection can be divided into two parts. Firstly, he disputes that Gods existent is self-evident for the human mind does not have an intuition of the essence of God [Summa Theologica]. Not everyone has a similar idea of God ( many of the Ancients said the world is God) so Anselms assertion that God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived, is only a subjective definition- if it came from an inborn idea, then every person would hold that one definition, which they dont. Copleston writes If we enjoyed an intuition of the divine essence we could not deny Gods existence; for there is, Aquinas maintained, no real distinction between them . But we do not enjoy any such intuition, and the proposition God Exists is not selfevident or analytic for the human mind. Secondly, Aquinas stated that not only is Anselms definition his own interpretation, but that we, as humans, cannot understand God because He is beyond the human capacity for understanding. We cannot define God; and it is therefore impossible to argue that God exists just from the word God. Useful QuotesThe human mind can make up a definition of the term God; and we can say that if that definition is correct, then God necessarily exists. However the question is: Do we have a correct definition of the term God? [Summa Theologica] Even if we do grant the meaning of God is supremely perfect being, it does not follow without more ado that God exists. To think that it does is to be guilty of an illicit transaction from the conceptual to the existential order [Copleston Aquinas, pages 112-113]

    You might also like