But as soon as a thing exists that can transform, all potential transformations exist as a property of that thing. It either is eternal, or originated by an unavoidable, logically necessary outcome of a nothing-state that lacked any power or property to prevent it. Otherwise, you have no argument. This book is only 300+ pages! Nothing more is required to make this so. While a challenging read and very philosophical, this book gives impressive arguments from philosophy supporting the existence of one God. So in short, the only way it seems possible to get any potential at all in the nothing state,. Its aim is to vindicate the view of the greatest philosophers of the past -- thinkers like Aristotle, Plotinus, Augustine, Aquinas, Leibniz, and many others -- that the existence of God can be established with certainty by way of purely rational arguments.
Seems like the author pretends there are far fewer possibilities than there actually are because it suits his purpose. This includes Buddhism and Hinduism. But it would also involve begging the question -- we are assuming God exists as the Destroyer to prove that God exists as the Maintainer. I was raised by my parents to be a Christian, go to church and have faith in God Almighty. Your review would, I think, make for an interesting blog post, at the very least.
Informally, the absence of anything to stop anything from happening, logically entails the presence of all possibilities. Spacetime is composite because it has proper parts: space and time, operates based on contingent regularities and is composed of essence and existence. For that reason, it is also the most heavily misconstrued of all the five arguments. My daughter will cry, but the Earth will keep spinning. Not by any definition pertinent to anyone, least of all Feser. Thomas Aquinas, and has written extensively on Aquinas' Five Ways or five proofs to God. In the second proof Feser claims that some entities are composite, and in order to remain composite they need to be held in existence by some other entity in a hierarchical series.
Ready to be vibrated into another photon someday. Rather, that when there is nothing, there is by definition nothing to prevent nothing from becoming something. Present a syllogism that proves spacetime cannot be a necessary being. Nor can it be argued that it actually , unless it be admitted that there actually something than which nothing greater can be thought; and this precisely is not admitted by those who hold that does not. Therefore if you try to remove intelligence from the uncaused substratum of all else, you remove the very possibility of it being the uncaused substratum of all else.
But just as there cannot be an infinite chain of efficient causes, so there cannot be an infinite chain of necessary beings whose necessity is caused by another necessary being. Two Dozen or so Arguments for God. Frankly this seems an insurmountable problem, but maybe you can prove me wrong. They argue that there is no need to postulate a maker for the world, just as there is no need for an author to compose the Vedas or a god to validate the rituals. Now, every necessary thing has its necessity caused by something else or it does not. While this argument does have some merit, drawing on the positive aspects of human intuition, it has limitations. We can explain how a ripple over here, moves across space-time like a wave on a sheet, to cause another ripple over there.
We have to be able to say that there is, as a matter of objective fact, such a thing as the nature or essence of a human being, and also that there is, as a matter of objective fact, such a thing as a set of final causes or ends or goals inherent in human nature, the realization of which defines what is good for us. Redemptive Encounters: Three Modern Styles in the Hindu Tradition Comparative Studies in Religion and Society. But there are things my theory predicts that his doesnot—and those things. But that is a fallacy. It is necessary to have one necessary being! These things are not of their nature necessarily co-occurring, after all.
Feser comes across like an idiot. We would love to continue bringing you the content, but we desperately need your help through monetary donations. If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. This, like many points in the book where Feser runs into trouble, is argument by intimidation. If, unbeknownst to me, dragons exist, then I am simply misinformed about dragons. He has been a Visiting Assistant Professor at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles and a Visiting Scholar at the Social Philosophy and Policy Center at Bowling Green State University in Bowling Green, Ohio.
Feser is confident in his view, but a portion of the best objections to his view s come from Ancient and Medieval philosophers. These positions deny that God intervenes in the operation of the universe, including communicating with humans personally. Proof required for biology is different to the type of proof required for theology. Potentials are directed towards a specific actualizations and potentials are rooted in things as they actually exist. Therefore, not all beings are merely possible, but there must something the of which is. As noted above, everything depends on the First Cause of its existence and causal powers and anything else that could possibly exist would as well , and hence this First Cause is omnipotent.