Skip to main content

From Image to Existence

The imperfection of humans and the world is quite obvious. The little boy bursts into tears because his mom refused to give him a cookie or someone is addicted to drugs. But is it possible that there is someone that is above all this mess? I can think of him, but it does not have anything to do with his existence, does it? Conceiving of a perfect God does in fact lead to the existence of such.
The argument is in the ontological category, which makes sense then that Aquinas is proving God is real through being, as this is what that group deals with. In the objection, Aquinas writes that once one understands what the term “‘God’” entails, the existence is then seen as well “[f]or by this word is signified that thing than which nothing greater can be conceived. But that which exists actually and mentally is greater than that which exists only mentally” (54). In order for nothing greater to be conceived than God because if the word is not understood, the concept of him cannot be created. He has to actually exist once we understand the word, otherwise he remains a figment of the mind and carries less weight than reality because he does not impact the world.
Picture a perfect ice cream cone in your mind. Seems really nice, does it not? That mental image of the ice cream is wonderful. It has the preferred flavor, the right amount of the confection, no drips (because perfect ice cream would not create a mess), and so on. But there is something missing from this sugary goodness. It is not real. You could create the best ice cream imaginable in your mind, but it does not matter because it does not exist. In order for it to be perfect, it has to consist of matter because otherwise it is stuck as a mental picture forever. That same principle applies to God. We could think of the perfect being, such as what makes up their qualities and features, but like that ice cream, the perfectness isn’t there till such a being exists. Of course, the ice cream cone does not pop into being because you picture it, which is why Aquinas explains that, just because something is imaginable does not mean it exists. So in talking about a perfect God, it doesn’t matter how loving, merciful, or good we say he is. That is why Kreeft writes that “‘God’ means ‘that which has all conceivable perfections’; and it is more perfect to exist really than only mentally; therefore God exists really” (63n19).  That is why it is the beginning of a proof for God’s existence. If we can think of a perfect God, then he must be real to in order to be complete.
Aquinas continues, saying that the proof is not fully logical “unless it be admitted that there actually exists something than which nothing greater can be thought,” otherwise it cannot be proven that God exists (57). That was the problem with the objection. It immediately assumed that because I can think of a perfect being, that means it must therefore exist, which is not the case. After conceiving of such, we have to admit that there is a possibility of that person having life, which stems from the fact of knowing the perfect can exist. It is a willingness to admit of a being far greater than yourself. Once that is the case, proof of God’s existence can be seen in the world around us. However, if one did not take that next step of admitting of the possibility of God being real, then it would be absurd to say that because I can conceive of it, that it must be. As a result of the ice cream example, we know this is not the case, because since that perfect cone still is not in my hand, the idea of God just will not pop into existence either. Therefore, believing that God can exist is a crucial aspect to proving that he does. Also, the fact that the world is imperfect points to having something perfect exist. If there is flawed, the faultless must be somewhere for us to know the world has shortcomings, otherwise the standards for how we view the world as fallen would not make sense.
Thinking of the perfect being can indeed lead to the proof of the perfect existing, but not just because it can be thought of. I can think of it and notice that since the world is imperfect, there must be perfection somewhere, and so this leads to creating the image of a perfect being. The mental picture has the possibility of existing because otherwise it would not be perfect, but it takes believing that it could, and that the perfect would be God.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Continuation of the Great Conversation

Reading. Discussion. Two things the Great Books program revolves around. Without them, Great Books wouldn't be the same and likely wouldn't exist. As I was reading The Screwtape Letters , I began noticing connections between the content and the program (and, to some extent, my thesis). The great conversation doesn't stop upon graduation, it flows throughout our entire lives. The form may change but it still continues; it's no longer sitting in a classroom discussion but instead finding connections in our daily lives, often between literature and life. Lewis discusses various ways that we can be led into sin and away from God in The Screwtape Letters . Many of the issues he mentions are still highly prevalent today. In one letter, Screwtape tells Wormwood about the progress they've made in disassociating the past from the present, mainly in terms of reading. By convincing modern readers to focus on anything but the truth behind a book, they've caused humanity to ...

Contract Course: Newton and Leibniz: Influenced and Influencing

People influence others, either for the better or for the worse. This fact is clearly seen in the priority dispute between Isaac Newton, an English mathematician and scientist, and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, a German mathematician and lawyer, over the invention of fluxions, or differential calculus, calculus concerned with derivatives and differentials, as a result of both releasing their findings around the same time. Claiming priority was important because the person received the recognition for their accomplishment, thereby showing that anyone else that published similar theories was most likely copying. Newton and Leibniz had multiple areas of influence, including other mathematicians, journals, or colleagues. The men would not have gotten to the point they were at in their knowledge and careers if it were not for multiple parties. The priority dispute over calculus was heavily influenced by the people who supported or criticized Newton and Leibniz, whether in the early or later st...

An Introduction

Hi! Welcome to my blog. To start I'm going to give the inspiration behind my blog name (because why not). I love penguins, sometimes even calling myself one, so that is where the first half comes from. With a book is because I love to read. If I had it my way that would be one of the only things I would do. (I want a job where I can do just that.) I have a fluffy, lazy, white cat names Snowball. Emphasis on fluffy and lazy. I enjoy acting if there is an opportunity. I really want to travel to Italy, one of the reasons being because of all the history there. The purpose for this blog is for the Great Books program at Faulkner University and to share work and thoughts related to the course. If you come away from here with a new idea, that's great! It will be interesting other's thoughts.