The March Philosophy Book of the Month is Final Notice by Van Fleisher. Discuss Final Notice now.

The April Philosophy Book of the Month is The Unbound Soul by Richard L. Haight. Discuss The Unbound Soul Now

The May Philosophy Book of the Month is Misreading Judas by Robert Wahler.

Logical Proof of God (Descartes + Aquinas)

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
Post Reply
User avatar
Jonathan A Bain
New Trial Member
Posts: 14
Joined: August 27th, 2019, 7:13 pm

Logical Proof of God (Descartes + Aquinas)

Post by Jonathan A Bain » September 29th, 2019, 4:10 pm

The idea I am about to express is a combination of Descartes proof of God as well as the proof from Aquinas. (Both those are worth exploring in themselves).

It goes like this:

Which is greater: A slug or nothing?
Obviously a slug is infinitely greater than nothing.

Would you believe somebody if they said a slug caused the universe?
Not likely!

So why do you believe those who say nothing caused the universe? It is infinitely more likely that the slug did it because we already know that a slug is infinitely greater than nothing.

Think a bit, before continuing, please.

Ok well that is just likelihoods. Something such as the universe is much greater than the slug, so that which is greater cannot come from that which is lesser.

But the universe is still infinitely greater than nothing!
So on that basis you cannot say the universe comes from nothing.

Ok so maybe it was not God but just super-aliens that caused the universe. Perhaps this entire universe is just a theme-park or the set of an elaborate alien movie, and we are just the decorations and extras.

Well in that sense, the super-aliens are pretty much God, not so? At least from our perspective, there is precious little difference...

User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 3694
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Logical Proof of God (Descartes + Aquinas)

Post by LuckyR » September 29th, 2019, 10:16 pm

Jonathan A Bain wrote:
September 29th, 2019, 4:10 pm
The idea I am about to express is a combination of Descartes proof of God as well as the proof from Aquinas. (Both those are worth exploring in themselves).

It goes like this:

Which is greater: A slug or nothing?
Obviously a slug is infinitely greater than nothing.

Would you believe somebody if they said a slug caused the universe?
Not likely!

So why do you believe those who say nothing caused the universe? It is infinitely more likely that the slug did it because we already know that a slug is infinitely greater than nothing.

Think a bit, before continuing, please.

Ok well that is just likelihoods. Something such as the universe is much greater than the slug, so that which is greater cannot come from that which is lesser.

But the universe is still infinitely greater than nothing!
So on that basis you cannot say the universe comes from nothing.

Ok so maybe it was not God but just super-aliens that caused the universe. Perhaps this entire universe is just a theme-park or the set of an elaborate alien movie, and we are just the decorations and extras.

Well in that sense, the super-aliens are pretty much God, not so? At least from our perspective, there is precious little difference...
To my mind, your best, most logical sentence is the second to last. If you believe that there are numerous alien civilizations in the universe, and that many of them are significantly more advanced than we are, they likely would be indistinguishable from gods from our perspective.

The beginning of your post is trying to use schoolyard turns of rhetoric to prove the unprovable.
"As usual... it depends."

User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 680
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Logical Proof of God (Descartes + Aquinas)

Post by h_k_s » September 30th, 2019, 2:22 pm

Jonathan A Bain wrote:
September 29th, 2019, 4:10 pm
The idea I am about to express is a combination of Descartes proof of God as well as the proof from Aquinas. (Both those are worth exploring in themselves).

It goes like this:

Which is greater: A slug or nothing?
Obviously a slug is infinitely greater than nothing.

Would you believe somebody if they said a slug caused the universe?
Not likely!

So why do you believe those who say nothing caused the universe? It is infinitely more likely that the slug did it because we already know that a slug is infinitely greater than nothing.

Think a bit, before continuing, please.

Ok well that is just likelihoods. Something such as the universe is much greater than the slug, so that which is greater cannot come from that which is lesser.

But the universe is still infinitely greater than nothing!
So on that basis you cannot say the universe comes from nothing.

Ok so maybe it was not God but just super-aliens that caused the universe. Perhaps this entire universe is just a theme-park or the set of an elaborate alien movie, and we are just the decorations and extras.

Well in that sense, the super-aliens are pretty much God, not so? At least from our perspective, there is precious little difference...
You @Jonathan A Bain are using a play on words and the double meaning of "nothing" to define your metaphysics of God.

Start over.

Try again.

Consider this:

1 - Nothing is better than having all the money in the world.

2 - A jelly sandwich is better than nothing.

3 - Ergo a jelly sandwich is better than all the money in the world.

Note the conflict in the contradiction.

Ergo your proof contains its own contradiction and is therefore INVALID.

User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 680
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Logical Proof of God (Descartes + Aquinas)

Post by h_k_s » September 30th, 2019, 2:23 pm

LuckyR wrote:
September 29th, 2019, 10:16 pm
Jonathan A Bain wrote:
September 29th, 2019, 4:10 pm
The idea I am about to express is a combination of Descartes proof of God as well as the proof from Aquinas. (Both those are worth exploring in themselves).

It goes like this:

Which is greater: A slug or nothing?
Obviously a slug is infinitely greater than nothing.

Would you believe somebody if they said a slug caused the universe?
Not likely!

So why do you believe those who say nothing caused the universe? It is infinitely more likely that the slug did it because we already know that a slug is infinitely greater than nothing.

Think a bit, before continuing, please.

Ok well that is just likelihoods. Something such as the universe is much greater than the slug, so that which is greater cannot come from that which is lesser.

But the universe is still infinitely greater than nothing!
So on that basis you cannot say the universe comes from nothing.

Ok so maybe it was not God but just super-aliens that caused the universe. Perhaps this entire universe is just a theme-park or the set of an elaborate alien movie, and we are just the decorations and extras.

Well in that sense, the super-aliens are pretty much God, not so? At least from our perspective, there is precious little difference...
To my mind, your best, most logical sentence is the second to last. If you believe that there are numerous alien civilizations in the universe, and that many of them are significantly more advanced than we are, they likely would be indistinguishable from gods from our perspective.

The beginning of your post is trying to use schoolyard turns of rhetoric to prove the unprovable.
I agree with you @LuckyR .

The other thing that @Jonathan A Bain is doing is assuming from ignorance.

User avatar
detail
Posts: 44
Joined: June 1st, 2019, 1:39 pm

Re: Logical Proof of God (Descartes + Aquinas)

Post by detail » October 1st, 2019, 11:28 am

I think this is according to the great philosopher douglas adams the following existential fact about whales:
(See further more https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/198068 ... at-against)

“Another thing that got forgotten was the fact that against all probability a sperm whale had suddenly been called into existence several miles above the surface of an alien planet.

And since this is not a naturally tenable position for a whale, this poor innocent creature had very little time to come to terms with its identity as a whale before it then had to come to terms with not being a whale any more.

This is a complete record of its thoughts from the moment it began its life till the moment it ended it.

Ah … ! What’s happening? it thought.

Er, excuse me, who am I?

Hello?

Why am I here? What’s my purpose in life?

What do I mean by who am I?

Calm down, get a grip now … oh! this is an interesting sensation, what is it? It’s a sort of … yawning, tingling sensation in my … my … well I suppose I’d better start finding names for things if I want to make any headway in what for the sake of what I shall call an argument I shall call the world, so let’s call it my stomach.

Good. Ooooh, it’s getting quite strong. And hey, what’s about this whistling roaring sound going past what I’m suddenly going to call my head? Perhaps I can call that … wind! Is that a good name? It’ll do … perhaps I can find a better name for it later when I’ve found out what it’s for. It must be something very important because there certainly seems to be a hell of a lot of it. Hey! What’s this thing? This … let’s call it a tail – yeah, tail. Hey! I can can really thrash it about pretty good can’t I? Wow! Wow! That feels great! Doesn’t seem to achieve very much but I’ll probably find out what it’s for later on. Now – have I built up any coherent picture of things yet?

No.

Never mind, hey, this is really exciting, so much to find out about, so much to look forward to, I’m quite dizzy with anticipation …

Or is it the wind?

There really is a lot of that now isn’t it?

And wow! Hey! What’s this thing suddenly coming towards me very fast? Very very fast. So big and flat and round, it needs a big wide sounding name like … ow … ound … round … ground! That’s it! That’s a good name – ground!

I wonder if it will be friends with me?

And the rest, after a sudden wet thud, was silence

User avatar
Mark1955
Posts: 705
Joined: July 21st, 2015, 4:02 am
Favorite Philosopher: David Hume
Location: Nottingham, England.

Re: Logical Proof of God (Descartes + Aquinas)

Post by Mark1955 » October 4th, 2019, 9:08 am

Jonathan A Bain wrote:
September 29th, 2019, 4:10 pm
So why do you believe those who say nothing caused the universe? It is infinitely more likely that the slug did it because we already know that a slug is infinitely greater than nothing.
I don't say nothing caused the universe, I cite the laws of physics, which I can observed. I conclude they are possibly a more effective explanation than a god, whichever one or more you're giving the credit to, for which I have no evidence.
If you think you know the answer you probably don't understand the question.

User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 680
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Logical Proof of God (Descartes + Aquinas)

Post by h_k_s » October 5th, 2019, 4:41 pm

For those who would like a more philosophical and less fallacious discussion, here is a list of all the classic, romantic proofs of God that I can think of from the top of my head:

1 - prime mover (Aristotle)

2 - first cause (Aquinas & Descartes)

3 - ontological proof (Descartes)

4 - artistic artificer (forgot who first came up with this one, which is mostly about biological symmetry)

5 - the greatest good (Aquinas & Descartes)

6 - the unchanging within a universe of change (Aquinas)

Feel free to correct any mistakes I have written. Add to this list as you see fit.

User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 3694
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Logical Proof of God (Descartes + Aquinas)

Post by LuckyR » October 5th, 2019, 8:34 pm

h_k_s wrote:
October 5th, 2019, 4:41 pm
For those who would like a more philosophical and less fallacious discussion, here is a list of all the classic, romantic proofs of God that I can think of from the top of my head:

1 - prime mover (Aristotle)

2 - first cause (Aquinas & Descartes)

3 - ontological proof (Descartes)

4 - artistic artificer (forgot who first came up with this one, which is mostly about biological symmetry)

5 - the greatest good (Aquinas & Descartes)

6 - the unchanging within a universe of change (Aquinas)

Feel free to correct any mistakes I have written. Add to this list as you see fit.
I'll just comment on the concept of the "proofs". Since by definition (of most Modern theists), the relative intellect of the humans proposing the proofs to that of which they are attempting to prove is less than that of a slug to a human, how much stead should we give to a slug's "proof" that humans exist? Logically we should give even less credence to the above proofs.
"As usual... it depends."

User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 680
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Logical Proof of God (Descartes + Aquinas)

Post by h_k_s » October 7th, 2019, 5:36 pm

LuckyR wrote:
October 5th, 2019, 8:34 pm
h_k_s wrote:
October 5th, 2019, 4:41 pm
For those who would like a more philosophical and less fallacious discussion, here is a list of all the classic, romantic proofs of God that I can think of from the top of my head:

1 - prime mover (Aristotle)

2 - first cause (Aquinas & Descartes)

3 - ontological proof (Descartes)

4 - artistic artificer (forgot who first came up with this one, which is mostly about biological symmetry)

5 - the greatest good (Aquinas & Descartes)

6 - the unchanging within a universe of change (Aquinas)

Feel free to correct any mistakes I have written. Add to this list as you see fit.
I'll just comment on the concept of the "proofs". Since by definition (of most Modern theists), the relative intellect of the humans proposing the proofs to that of which they are attempting to prove is less than that of a slug to a human, how much stead should we give to a slug's "proof" that humans exist? Logically we should give even less credence to the above proofs.
Actually I hold philosophical proofs in higher regard than theist notions.

For me, the theists are the slugs.

Post Reply