MM#249--Philosophy 101--Aquinas, part 2

Welcome to the Theory to Action podcast, where we examine the timeless treasures of wisdom from the great books in less time, to help you take action immediately and ultimately to create and lead a flourishing life. Now here's your host, David Kaiser.

Hello, i am David and welcome back to another Mojo Minute And welcome back to our continuing series of Philosophy 101. Thank you very much for joining us. As I keep saying, we are going to take a deep dive in the deep end of the pool in Philosophy 101, our little mini course we have going on here And most people are enjoying it. Now, our guide and mentor for this mini course if you've been following along with us in Philosophy 101 is the professor Peter Krief. And who is Peter Krief? Well, he wrote a great four volume series of books called Socrates Children, which offer us a roadmap, a very simple roadmap, for understanding this wonderful philosophical deep dive. In the beginning of this four volumes, peter Krief tells us in fact he reminds us that we only need to know nine big philosophers in all of human history. Why? Because they represent the big ideas that we are confronted with on a daily basis. The others you know, the other 91, i guess, if my math is good, public school education there The other 91, they are just filling in the gaps of the big nine. So that should give us some reassurance. If we don't like reading Philosophy, we can just read the big nine philosophers. And who are these big nine. They are again real quick Socrates, plato, aristotle, augustine, aquinas, descartes, hume, kant and Hegel. And keeping up our tradition of putting the previous Philosophy 101 episodes in the show notes We want never to do that again So you can catch up if you missed any and re-listen to them again, if possible. Now, with all that administrative stuff out of the way, let's dive into St Thomas Aquinas, part two. And if you listen to part one, you know that St Thomas Aquinas is one of the greatest in all of human history. He was born in 1225, lived all the way till 1274. And again, our book that we're pulling these quotes from is Socrates' Children by Professor Peter Krief. And with that let's roll to our first poll quote on this great saint and philosopher. End of the book Aquinas' writings and how to read them. In his short 25-year career he wrote tens of thousands of pages, over 8 million words, including 2 million commenting on the Bible and 1 million on Aristotle alone, in addition to his unfinished masterpiece, the Summa Theologia. The Summa is not a closed system but an ordered summary, a mirror of reality, beginning in God, proceeding to creation, centering on man, culminating in man's search for happiness and return to God, who is the Alpha and the Omega. Reality is seen as a kind of cosmic circulatory system, with the heart of God pumping the blood of being through the arteries of creation into the universe, which wears a human face, and receiving the cosmos back through the veins of man's reason and free choice of moral virtue, faith, hope and love. Is that not a fascinating picture, fantastically beautiful, if we think of God's whole creation as a what did Creef call it? a kind of cosmic circulatory system, with the heart of God pumping the blood of being through the arteries of creation in the universe And we, in the human face, we receive that grace and then we give it back in free choice of a moral virtue, faith, hope and love. Just fantastic writing and impeccable analogy by Peter Creef. Very, very good stuff, in fact. I'm sure we'll come back to it again and again. That same picture, that same analogy, the cosmic circulatory system. Even if you're not a theologian, a Catholic, a Christian or a theist, your mind will be powerfully exercised and improved by reading Aquinas. Read him slowly. It is more like reading Euclid than reading Dickens. Now, total aside, we will cut. We will read Euclid later on. He's in the pipeline, because how did our 16th president of the United States, abraham Lincoln. How did he teach himself to argue law? He read, of all people, euclid. About mathematics, straightforward arguments, and that is how, in many biographies, over and over, i have read where Lincoln, reading Euclid, gave him clarity of writing and thinking. Very fascinating stuff. Going back to the book about Aquinas, Read him slowly. It's more like reading Euclid than reading Dickens. It is like eating spinach. It may taste strange at first but it makes you strong. His habits of clarity, order and logic rub off even when you disagree with him. He is always scrupulously fair, though his style is utter, utterly prosaic. Compared to Augustine's, his fanatical honesty and passion for the truth is similar. Very important point on Aquinas passion for the truth. A CIA agent recruiting for spies among philosophers would find no two more hopelessly inept liars than these two, meaning Augustine and Aquinas. The basic unit of the summa is the article, which is a very abbreviated summary of a debate. It is typically one to three pages long and it contains five parts, all of which are necessary for a complete logical treatment. Number one the question is formulated in a yes or no pro con format. Quote weather, dot, dot, dot. Number two all the major objections to Aquinas's answer are stated as clearly and strongly and fairly as possible. Quote it seems that dot dot, dot, number three, the argument from a past authority for Aquinas's answer, is given. Quote on the contrary, dot dot, dot, number four. The main body of the article then defines terms, explains presumptions and proves its conclusions with syllogisms. Quote I answer that dot, dot, dot, number five. Each objection is answered usually by distinguishing two meanings of ambiguous terms, thus perceiving half half truths. In each objection, quote, i respond dot dot, dot. Like this Socratic Dialogue, it is an imminently immeantable can't say that word immit, tatable, imitatable format, and that is the power of St Thomas Aquinas. His writing is very clear. If my pronunciation isn't so clear, aquinas's writing is very ordered and indeed the logic does rub off as you read it, and I just love those five parts of each of the articles. Now, speaking of five, the most famous of St Thomas Aquinas is five is the notion that he proved the existence of God through reason, and his most famous of all arguments the five ways in the Summa Theologiae. We have some heavy sledding in front of us, so to speak. Let's begin to hammer away, and we have some long quotes, but I thought it is well worth it. The most famous of all arguments for the existence of God are Aquinas's five ways in the Summa Theologiae One, two and three. They are abbreviated summaries of longer, more complex arguments, ie the first way takes only one paragraph in the Summa Theologiae, but 21 paragraphs in the Summa Contra Gentiles. They're common strategies. To begin with an empirical observation of some feature of the world, ie motion, change coming into being, contingency, the possibility to not exist or to go out of existence, degrees of perfection, in order Then use the principle of causality to prove that these empirical phenomena are not inexplicable, explainable, sorry, not explicable. To prove that these empirical phenomena are not explainable unless there is a first and uncaused cause, which is one of the unique properties of God. The five proofs correspond to five kinds of causality cause of motion, change, cause of existence, cause of necessity, cause of degrees of perfection or goodness and cause of order. Tell logical order to an end And each. The essential argument is that if there is no first uncaused cause, there could be no second caused causes, no matter how many these may be, but there are second causes. Therefore there must be a first cause. Thus we conclude to a being with five divine attributes. Number one unmoved mover. Number two uncaused cause of existence. Number three necessarily and eternally existent. Number four absolutely perfect standard of perfection. And number five intelligent cause of order to an end. Whoa, wrap your mind around that. It was just hard enough to read it, let alone think about it. But very, very good stuff, certainly very close to the truth. Now let's quote the famous argument verbatim from Aquinas, whether God exists. Objection 1, it seems that God does not exist because if one of the two Contraries be infinite, the other would be altogether destroyed. But the word God means that he is infinite goodness. If, therefore, god existed, there would be no evil discoverable, but there is evil in the world. Therefore, god does not exist. Objection number two Further, it is Superfluous to suppose that what can be accounted for by a few principles have been produced by many, but it seems that everything we see in the world can be accounted for by other principles. Supposing God did not exist, for all natural things can be reduced to one principle the source, which is nature, and all voluntary things can be reduced to one principle, which is human reason or will. Therefore, there is no need to suppose God's existence. On the contrary, note that phrase. On the contrary, it is said in the person of God I am, who am Exodus 314,. I answer that Again. Note that I answer that phrase. I answer that The existence of God can be proved in five ways. The first and more manifest way is the argument for motion change, any change. It is certain and evident to our senses that in the world, some things are in motion. Now, whatever is in motion is put in motion by another, for nothing can be in motion except in its potentiality to, to that towards which is in motion, whereas a thing moves in as much as it is, in act, the actuality of it. Thus, that which is actually hot, such as fire, makes wood, which is potentially hot, to be actually hot and thereby moves and changes it. Now, it is not possible that the same thing should be at once in actuality and potentiality, in the same respect, but only in different respects, for what is actually hot cannot simultaneously be potentially hot but it is potentially cold. It is therefore impossible that in the same respect, in the same way, anything should be both mover and moved, that it should not move itself. Therefore, whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another. Stay with me If that by which is in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on, ie regress to infinity, because then there would be no first mover and consequently no other mover, seeing that subsequent movers move only in his motion, as they are put in motion by the first mover, as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore, it is necessary to arrive at a first mover put in motion by no other, and this everyone understands to be God, right on right on Good stuff. right there It's moving. Let's move on to the second way. We're not going to cover all five ways, but the second way is a compelling proof of God as well. Actually, all five are compelling proofs of God. We just don't have the time to cover all five in complete depth, so we're going to cover number three or, i'm sorry, number two, and let's go back to the book to cover number two. The second proof for the reason of, for the reason of God to exist. The second way is from the nature of the efficient cause. In the world of sense we find there is an order of efficient causes. There is no case known. Neither is it indeed possible in which a thing is to be found, is found to be the efficient cause of itself, for it so would be prior to itself, which is impossible. Now, in efficient causes, it is not possible to go on to infinity because in all efficient causes, following an order, the first is the cause of the intermediate cause and the intermediate cause is the cause of the ultimate cause, whether the intermediate cause be several or one. Only Now, to take away the cause is to take away the effect. Therefore, if there be no first cause among efficient causes, there will be no ultimate, nor any immediate cause. But if an efficient cause is, it is possible to go on to infinity. There will be no efficient cause, follow me. Neither will there be an ultimate effect, nor any intermediate effect causes, all of which is plainly false. Therefore, it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everything gives the name of God. Oh yeah, so some very deep, heavy, philosophical language there. Wrap your minds around. One last quote, i promise we're going to skip three, proof three and proof four. We're going to hit proof five and then we will wrap up. St Thomas Aquinas, part two. The fifth way is taken from the governance governance of the world We see that things which lack intelligence, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always and nearly always, from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that not fortuitously but designedly do they achieve their end. Now, whatever lacks intelligence cannot move towards an end unless it be directed by some being with knowledge and intelligence, as the arrow is shot to its mark by the archer, therefore, some intelligent being exists, by whom all things are directed to their end In this being we call God. Now the reply to Objection One is, as Augustine says, since God is the highest good, he would not allow any evil to exist in his works unless his omnipotence and goodness were such to bring good even out of evil. This is part of the infinite goodness of God that he should allow evil to exist and out of it produce good. And the reply to Objection Number Two is, since nature works for a determinant and under the direction of a higher agent, whatever is done by nature must be traced back to God as its first cause. So also, whatever is done voluntarily must also be traced back to some higher cause other than human reason and will, since these can change and fail, for all things that are changeable and capable of defect must be traced back to an immovable and self-necessary first principle, as was shown in the body of the article. All right, coming up for air. I know that's deep and profound, very difficult to listen to just in a simple podcast, but I think that was all very, very good. Thank you for hanging with me Now. St Thomas Aquinas was writing all that in the 13th century, essentially proving in five ways the existence of God through human reason. Now we could spend another 100 episodes on St Thomas Aquinas, but I think you can get a feel for him now and why he is so great, so pivotal. So in this Mojo Minute, let's use Peter Creef's own closing on his section on St Thomas Aquinas to end this Mojo Minute. Aquinas, as a Christian, knew that merely natural, rational virtue is incomplete. Reason alone can tell us, as it told pagans like Plato and Aristotle, that our supreme happiness lies in union with God, and it can show us our natural desire for God, but it cannot tell us how to attain this desire. Only God's supernatural grace and love revealed in history the incarnation Jesus Christ in person, god made man in person and accepted by faith, can meet and fulfill our deepest natural longing, bottom line. Without Christ, we are doomed to ultimate pessimism and frustration. Ultimately, aquinas' ethics is a detailing or an unpackaging or completion of Augustine's restless heart. Remember from our previous mojo minute our hearts are restless until they rest in you, is what Augustine said. Therefore, aquinas synthesizes. He synthesizes not only Augustine and Aristotle. He synthesizes theology and philosophy, the Bible and the Greeks, the soul and the body, reason and senses, intellect and will, faith and reason, natural and supernatural, but even God and man in Christ. His philosophy is the ultimate both and instead of either or, and that is probably the greatest compliment you could ever say of Thomas Aquinas.

Thank you for joining us. We hope you enjoyed this Theory to Action podcast. Be sure to check out our show page at teammojoacademycom, where we have everything we discussed in this podcast, as well as other great resources. Until next time, keep getting your mojo on.