DE GUZMAN, Lanier T.

06 January 2020
PH2-01 Dr. Maximo De Chavez Ilag

Quinque Viae: To defend the existence of the Christian God

Introduction

Philosopher and theologian St. Thomas Aquinas uses “five proofs” in his book
Summa Theologica as the primary rational arguments to defend the existence of the
Christian God. Five Ways are better viewed as an introduction to the idea of God’s
existence. However, they are easily misunderstood and critics have alternatively over-
complicated, over-simplified, or simply misinterpreted Aquinas’ true intention – to
demonstrate a general, objective, rational case for God’s existence grounded in reason
and observation.

Formulation of Five Ways

The Quinque Viae (Latin, usually translated as “Five Ways” or “Five Proofs”) are
five (5) logical arguments regarding the existence of God summarized by the 13th
century. They are:

I. The Argument from Change (“Motion”)

Aquinas points out that all changes are the result of some other change. But this
chain of changes cannot be infinite, so there must be some un-changed (un-moving)
thing (an un-moved Mover) that is ultimately responsible for all other changes (motion).

Change is inevitable in the sense that things move from a “potential” state to an
“actual” state. But this potential is for something that does not yet exist and so requires
something else to actualize it. There must exist some un-changed and un-changing
thing that actualizes all other changes. This principle points out the need to have
something capable of causing the changes we observe: God, the Un-Moved Mover.
DE GUZMAN, Lanier T. 06 January 2020
PH2-01 Dr. Maximo De Chavez Ilag

II. The Argument from Causality

Aquinas based on the fact that all effects are caused by some other event, which
in turn is the effect of some other cause. There must be some un-caused cause: God,
the First Cause.

Cause and effect – everything that occurs is caused by something else. All
events are dependent on some other occurrence or thing in order to make them
happen. A thing cannot be the cause of itself, or else it would never come to exist. There
must be an un-caused thing that causes all other things. This argument considers the
fact that all things are dependent on something else for their existence.

III. The Argument from Contingency

Aquinas’s third argument is that, if everything were impermanent, eventually

everything would cease to be. Therefore, there must be at least one thing that must,
necessarily, exist (one non-contingent thing): God, the Necessary Being.

We often observe things that cease to exist, falling victim to death, destruction, or
decay. Eventually, all non-necessary things cease to be. But, if it were possible
for everything to cease to exist, and if there has been an infinite amount of past time,
then all things would have already ceased to exist. There would be nothing left at all.
The fact that anything exists at all, even now, means there must be one thing that
cannot cease to exist, one thing that must necessarily exist. There must be one thing
that is non-contingent which its existence is not dependent on anything else. This
thing must be.

IV. The Argument from Perfection

Aquinas’s fourth argument in favor of God’s existence points out that, in

order to speak of “goodness” or “power,” we must have an absolute standard against
which to judge those terms; there must be some other thing from which they ultimately
derive that characteristic: God, the Ultimate Standard.
DE GUZMAN, Lanier T. 06 January 2020
PH2-01 Dr. Maximo De Chavez Ilag

Every trait we see, in every object, is compared to some standard: health,

morality, strength, and so forth. The fact that we instinctively see degrees in these areas
implies that there is some ultimate standard against which to judge that property with a
common sense of “perfection.” This means there must be some ultimate standard of
“perfection” from which to judge all other properties; those objects cannot be the source
or definition of that property in and of themselves.

V. The Argument from Purpose

Aquinas’s fifth way involves the fact that inanimate matter and energy do not
exhibit intelligence or purpose. When we see something unintelligent that appears to
have some specific purpose or that fulfills some purposeful role, we must assume that
thing to have been given that purpose by some other intelligence. Ultimately, this leads
to God, the Grand Designer.

Many things in the universe “drive” toward a particular end, not random results.
Magnets “drive” to seek metal or to align their poles. Seeds “drive” to become adult
plants, not animals. This regularity, as opposed to randomness, is a sign of purpose—of
intention or intelligence. However, magnets and seeds and such have no intelligence of
their own. Therefore, their “drive” must be the result of some external intelligence setting
or fixing or designing their behavior. In some means or mechanism, all purposes and
functions must originate in some intelligent entity.

Conclusion

First three arguments share a common theme: causality and logic that lead to an
inference of existence or simply referred to as the cosmological argument.
Fundamentally, the fourth argument is almost identical to the ontological argument.
Aquinas was arguing that goodness or power in some finite object can only come from
some other, greater source. Fifth argument is similar to the modern-day argument
from Intelligent Design or teleological argument. However, this argument presumes that
individual components have some form of drive or initiative in and of themselves.
Intelligent Design, on the other hand, presumes that individual components like atoms
or energy have no particular purpose or function outside of an intelligent intervention.