Augustine vs. Aquinas

•      Augustine was a    while Aquinas was an

•      Augustine's divine illumination theory vs

•      .

•      But both agreed we are

•      .

•      If reason and faith conflict,

•       

Natural or Philosophical Theology

•      Using reason alone Aquinas thought he could prove:

•      The existence of God

•      The attributes of God

•      The immortality of the soul

•      The highest good is eternal life

•      The basic laws of morality

Aristotle on divine knowledge

•      God is a perfect knower.

•      God can only perfect things

•      There are no perfect things below the orbit of the moon.

•      Therefore, God cannot know anything below the orbit of the moon.

Aquinas’ responses

•      I. God know himself

•      God is the first cause of the cosmos

•      God knows himself as first cause.

•      If one knows the cause, one must know the effect.  The mover analogy

•      II. God’s own ideas are the prototypes for creation; therefore, by knowing them, God also knows creation.

A critic’s response

•      In response to II, if God knows the prototypes, then God knows only their essence not their full existence.  Humanity itself, not particular human beings.

•      Following upon this conclusion, the mover analogy fails because would you trust a moving company that could only move things according to tables and chair but not your tables and chairs?

Aquinas: Five Ways to Prove God’s Existence

•      The Argument from motion:

•      There is motion in the universe--”movers” moving things that in turn are moved by other “movers.”

•      There cannot be an infinite regress of movers.

•      Therefore, there must be an unmoved mover (=God), the cause of all movement.

The argument from efficient cause

•      There are effects in the universe that are caused by causes that are effects of other causes.

•      There cannot be an infinite regress of causes.

•      Therefore, there must be a first cause (=God) that remains uncaused.

Contingent vs. necessary things

•      A “contingent” thing is one that is

•      A “necessary” thing is one that is

•      A substance is a

•       

•      The argument from contingency       

•      There are contingent things.

•      Contingent things require a non-contingent, necessary thing for their existence.

•      Therefore, a necessary thing (God) must exist.

The argument from morality

•      Comparative moral judgments are made--the good, the better, the best.

•      Such judgments are intelligible only on the basis of a moral standard that embodies the best.

•      Therefore, such a moral standard (=God) exists.

•      Note the Platonic idea that the highest reality is also the highest good.

The argument from design

•      There is order and structure in the universe.

•      Such order requires a cosmic ordering agent.

•      Therefore, there must be such an agent.

•      No other word describe such an agent except God.

Aquinas on Revealed Theology

•      Basic Articles of Faith:

•      Incarnation:

•      Trinity:

•      Creation out of nothing

•      Beatific Vision of God

•      Certainty of individual redemption

Rational vs. Theological Eudaimonism

•      Both Aristotle and Aquinas agreed that

•      Rational Eudaimonism:

•      Aquinas rejected Aristotle’s

•      Theological Eudaimonism:

The Overendowment Thesis

•      Premise: there are ways in which all natural appetites are fulfilled in some fashion.

•      ”It is inconceivable to me that nature should have endowed us with a set of appetites if there were no ways for them to be satisfied.  If our hunger for eternity--the deepest hunger of all--should turn out to be the one hunger for which there is no satisfaction, it would be a cruel trick."

Aquinas’ argument

•      Humans have a natural desire for perfect happiness.

•      “It is impossible for a natural desire to be empty and vain.”  (Even animals have their natural desires fulfilled.)

•      The desire for perfect happiness cannot be fulfilled in this life.

•      Therefore, it must be fulfilled after this life.

The Argument from Analogy

See Lecture Notes for graphics

Was Jesus a theological eudaimonist?

•      An ethics of love:

–  You should love your neighbor as yourself.

–  You should love your enemies.

–  You should lay down your live for another.

•      Greek concepts of love:

–  eros.

–  philia.

Theological Agapeism

•      Jesus used the word agape:

•      Christians must be self-sacrificing and Christ-like,

•       

•      Eudaimonists have confused

•       

•      Must avoid a barter system of ethics.

Theological vs. Rational Agapeism

•      Rational Agapeism:

•       

•      Michael Scriven: if it is one-on-one, then one counts the value of the person.  If there are more than two people, all persons then count as equal.

•      If Martha can save the lives of two people only by sacrificing her life, then she is morally required to.

Scriven’s proof

•      Selfish society subjected to a series of natural catastrophes

•      Three soldiers from this society in a fox hole

•       

•      Altruistic society subjected to the same calamities.

•      Three soldiers from this society in a fox hole

•       

Determinism vs. free-will

•      Scientific determinism:

•      No thing is a cause of itself, such as the human will.

•      Humans have no free-will and

•      Does divine power and determinism undermine human freedom?

Three Types of Divine Power

•      DP 1: 

•      Martin Luther rejects free-will.

•      John Calvin and predestination.

•      Luther:

Delegating divine power

•      DP 2:

•       

•      God reserves “veto” power for

•       Aquinas and most contemporary Christian philosophers.

A critique of DP2

•      Are science and morality properly supported under DP2?

•      Not if free-will requires a power “truly our own.”

•      And not if science and its laws require immunity from divine intervention.

Divine Persuasion

•      DP3:

•       

•      God has no veto power.

•      Full autonomy for both moral agents and the laws of nature.

•      Process and feminist theologians. A truly humanist theology?

What is a proposition?

•      Proposition

•      Statement in ordinary language.

•      The house is red

Analytic propositions

•      Aquinas calls them “self-evident.”

•      All circles are round

•      All triangles have three sides

•      All squares have four sides

•      All bachelors are unmarried males

A test for analyticity

•      Use the law of contradiction by negating the predicate.

•      All circles are NOT round.

•      All triangles are NOT three-sided.

•      All squares are NOT four-sided.

•      All bachelors are NOT married.

•      Reductio ad absurdum.  The original statements are necessarily true.

Synthetic propositions

•      The truth of synthetic propositions are

•      Gold is found in Siberia

•      Contingent on the fact of there always being gold in Siberia.

•      Test it

•      Synthetic props.                             Analytic props. do not.

Aquinas’ Proof: Short Form

•      Aquinas: moral propositions are analytic.

•      The Sixth Commandment: Thou shalt not kill!

•      Thou shalt kill! 

•      Thou shalt steal!

•      Thou shalt commit adultery!

The Full Argument

•      Logic and Formal Reason: Never A and non-A in the same time, place, and manner.

•      Metaphysics and Speculative Reason: 

•       

•      Ethics and Practical Reason:       

•       

•      The law of contradiction working at the ethical level.

Aquinas’virtue ethics

•      The proof above gives only an abstract guideline:

•      Josef Pieper: prudentia as “the ability of the [soul] to listen in silent attention to the language of reality.”

•      “Those who know causation know the Dharma.”

•       .

•      The virtues provide.

•      Prudentia allows for the.

•      Even in Aquinas, the virtues

General vs. special providence

•      Just as humans are providential (caring ) about things under their will, so too is God

•       

•      General Providence:

•      Special Providence:

•   Special Revelation:

•   General Revelation:

Quiz on Providence

•      No Providence?

–   

•      General Providence?

–   

•      Special Providence?

–   

Morality and Revelation

•      Is special providence (revelation) necessary for morality?

•      Can an atheist be moral?

•      Aquinas agrees in Ro. 2:14-15.

Aquinas’ Intentionism

•      Moral value lies in.

•      Consequentialism:

•      Proof of Intentionism:

•      Proof of Consequentialism:

The Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE)

•      The meaning of “double”:

–   

–  .

•      Note: Aquinas explicitly rejects the assumptions of this theory.  Therefore, it is not his theory.

Four Criteria for DDE

•      The action in itself must be good.

•      The agent must intend only the good effect and not the evil effect.  The evil effect is foreseen, not intended.

•      The evil effect cannot be a means to the good effect.

•      There must be a favorable balance between the good and evil effects of the action.

•      Fourth criteria added in 19th Century.  Any problems with it?

Actions allowed by DDE

•      One may use medication to save pregnant mother's life, even if it is known to produce miscarriages. 

•      One may remove the cancerous womb of a pregnant woman because of same reason.

•      One may draw off amniotic fluid if the intention is to save the mother's life.

•      If the fertilized egg implants itself outside the uterus (an "ectopic" pregnancy), then it can be removed surgically.

•      But fetal craniotomy is not permissible?