Defending Aquinas's De Ente Argument for God's Existence w/ Dr. Gaven Kerr
Mar 7, 2023
auto_awesome
Dr. Gaven Kerr discusses objections to Aquinas's De Ente argument for God's existence, delving into metaphysical analysis, ontological pluralism vs. monistic conception, brilliance of Aquinas's arguments, nominalism's challenge, realism vs. nominalism, existential inertia, and objections to Aquinas's philosophy of God.
Aquinas's De Ente argument emphasizes the indivisible nature of pure existence and the critical distinction between essence and existence.
Challenges to Aquinas's argument question the possibility of multiple instances of pure existence without violating its simplicity.
Critiques of Aquinas's argument regarding the principle of identity of indiscernibles are refuted, showcasing the argument's robustness.
Aquinas's methodology in the multiplicity argument aligns with a priori reasoning, establishing the essence of multiplication as requiring a principle for multiplication.
Deep dives
Exploring the Scrutiny of Thomism and the Deante Argument
Thomism and the Deante argument are put to the test through a series of objections, tackling the complexities of Aquinas's philosophical thought amidst recent skepticism. Dr. Gavin Kerr engages in a compelling discussion, highlighting the need to scrutinize Aquinas's philosophical work, emphasizing its significance in the history of philosophy.
Multiplicity Argument: Distinguishing Essence and Existence
Aquinas's multiplicity argument delves into the essence of existence, pointing out that if something's essence is identical to its existence, it cannot be multiplied. The argument stresses the indivisible nature of pure existence and the impossibility of multiple instances, illustrating the critical distinction between essence and existence.
Addressing Objections on Separability in Pure Existence
Challenges to Aquinas's multiplicity argument question whether there can be two distinct instances of pure existence without violating its simplicity. By demonstrating that pure existence cannot be subject to a nature or principle of multiplication, the argument tackles the underlying metaphysics, rejecting assumptions of individuation and emphasizing the indivisible nature of pure existence.
Refuting Assumptions of Indiscernibility and Multiplication
Critiques of Aquinas's multiplicity argument suggesting the principle of identity of indiscernibles are refuted. The argument remains robust without depending on such principles, emphasizing the unique nature of pure existence and its indivisibility. Dr. Gavin Kerr navigates the complexities of metaphysics, clarifying the deductive aspects of the argument.
Asserting Conceptual and A Priori Foundations in Multiplication
Aquinas's methodology in the multiplicity argument is examined to distinguish conceptual and a priori principles of multiplication. By establishing the essence of multiplication as requiring a principle for multiplication, the argument aligns with Aquinas's a priori reasoning. Dr. Gavin Kerr reinforces the deductive structure of the argument, showcasing the foundational concepts at play.
Critique of Avicenna's Conception of Essay as an Accident
Avicenna's view stems from his three-fold consideration of essence, where existence topping up essence is seen as a mode of potential being. This makes possibility more fundamental than existence, implying that existence merely adds to a more fundamental essence. In contrast, Aquinas insists existence is the highest act, rejecting the idea that it merely tops up essence.
Essence and Existence in God's Knowledge of Contingent Creation
God's knowledge of contingent creation is distinct from our understanding as He grasps it through His divine essence, not abstracted conceptual content. God's understanding transcends representational concepts, ensuring that existence is not contingent on abstracted content. Even when creatures abstract conceptual content from contingent things, it need not be contingent itself, as in the case of mathematical concepts.
Existential Inertia and Thomas Aquinas's Response
Existence as an inertial property subsists in things, requiring actual existence rather than topping up essence. Thomas argues against Avicenna's view that makes existence an accident to essence, emphasizing that existence is fundamental, not contingent on abstract concepts. Avicenna's approach highlights the primacy of essence over existence, contrasting Aquinas's view that existence is the act of all acts.
Pat throws a bunch of (mostly higher level) objections against Aquinas's De Ente argument for the existence of God. Dr. Gaven Kerr responds. Will Thomism survive the stress test? Tune in to find out!
