For Elenore Stump's "Simplicity": choose and briefly explain one of the four claims that
Stump says are involved in the concept of simplicity.
According to Stump, in order for God to be absolutely perfect, God requires simplicity. By this,
Stump means that God is simple in the way that God “lacks composition of any sort” (270). In
order for God to have simplicity: God cannot have any spatial or temporal parts, God cannot
have intrinsic accidental properties, there cannot be any distinction between one essential
property and another in God’s nature, and there cannot be a real distinction between essence and
existence in God. The most abstract claim is the fourth. This claim creates the notion that “talk
of attributes is misleading” concerning a simple God (271). If attributes of God could be
distinguished, then an individual could separate existent God and the essence of God. However,
a simple god is “so radically one” that God is identical with his essence in a way such that his
existence cannot be distinguished from his essence. All four claims can be simplified as God
having no parts.
2. For St. Augustine's "Faith and Reason:" what is it that Augustine concludes is
"something higher than our mind and reason?" Does he identify this thing with God?
According to Augustine and Evodius, God is a being “which has nothing superior to it” (66). In
his dialogue with Evodius, Augustine explains that man’s reason is what sets man apart from
animals and questions Evodius if a being with reason superior to that of man is worthy of being
called God. Augustine first explains immutable truths to Evodius and details how truth “is
neither inferior nor equal” to the minds of man (68). Thus, immutable truths have to be higher
and more excellent than the reasoning of man. Augustine further explains that truth then brings
about unequivocal happiness and delight to man. Augustine speaks of truth itself that shines a
light upon all other truths, which Augustine identifies with God. “It is the Truth Himself” that
dispenses truth to man that will set man free (69).
3. For Anselm's Proslogion: why does Anselm believe it is impossible to think God doesn't
To Anselm, God is “something than which nothing greater can be thought (STWNGBT)” (99).
Even those who do not believe in God, can conceive the idea of STWNGBT. Through this
Anselm stresses that because an individual can conceive the idea, a God must surely exist.
Anselm provides the analogy of a painter that has an idea in his head of his next masterpiece,
even though the masterpiece does not yet exist. Thus, Anselm expresses his idea that “if it exists
only in the understanding, it can be thought to exist in reality as well, which is greater” (100).
By this, Anselm means that a being that exists in reality is much greater than a being that exists
in the mind alone. As such, if a being fails to exist in reality, it fails to be STWNGBT. This
ultimately leads to the idea that there is something greater that must exist in both mind and
reality, which Anselm equates to God.

The argument from motion perhaps contains the greatest weight for the argument. To Aquinas. For Aquinas' Summa Theologiae: choose one of Aquinas' "Five Ways" and describe in your own words how he reaches his conclusion. In order for this God to be purely actual. this purely actual being that initiates change. perfect. and immutable. he must be omnipotent. Aquinas’ five ways to prove God exists are: The argument from motion. and argument from design. Aquinas observes that change/movement in an object requires a changer/mover to act upon the object. and that an object cannot cause its own change.4. . the unmoved mover. argument from possibility and necessity. This forms a chain of dependence that requires an object that is purely actual that started it all. In this argument. eternal. is God. argument from gradation of being. non-physical. There must exist something that moves an object from its potential to its actuality. Aquinas describes an unmoved mover that is required to be a causal power that set everything into motion. omniscient. argument from efficient causes.