Argument from degree

Last updated

The argument from degrees, also known as the degrees of perfection argument or the henological argument [1] is an argument for the existence of God first proposed by mediaeval Roman Catholic theologian Thomas Aquinas as one of the five ways to philosophically argue in favour of God's existence in his Summa Theologica . It is based on ontological and theological notions of perfection. [2] Contemporary Thomist scholars are often in disagreement on the metaphysical justification for this proof.[ citation needed ] According to Edward Feser, the metaphysics involved in the argument has more to do with Aristotle than Plato; hence, while the argument presupposes realism about universals and abstract objects, it would be more accurate to say Aquinas is thinking of Aristotelian realism and not Platonic realism per se.

Contents

Aquinas's original formulation

The fourth proof arises from the degrees that are found in things. For there is found a greater and a less degree of goodness, truth, nobility, and the like. But more or less are terms spoken of various things as they approach in diverse ways toward something that is the greatest, just as in the case of hotter (more hot) that approaches nearer the greatest heat. There exists therefore something that is the truest, best, and most noble, and in consequence, the greatest being. For what are the greatest truths are the greatest beings, as is said in the Metaphysics Bk. II. 2. What moreover is the greatest in its way, in another way is the cause of all things of its own kind (or genus); thus fire, which is the greatest heat, is the cause of all heat, as is said in the same book (cf. Plato and Aristotle). Therefore there exists something that is the cause of the existence of all things and of the goodness and of every perfection whatsoever—and this we call God. [3] [4]

Garrigou-Lagrange Commentary

In The One God, Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange offers commentary on this proof. Following is a summary of this commentary.

Summary of argument

The premise of the fourth proof is that “being and its transcendental and analogous properties (unity, truth, goodness, beauty) are susceptible of greater and less.” [5] Thus it is said that some things are more true, more good, etc.

After this premise follows the principle that “More or less are predicated of different things according as they resemble in their different ways something which is the maximum of and which is the cause of the others.” [5] Following is a justification of this principle.

  1. Multiple different things are found to share a unity, or a common relation to truth and goodness. However, the similarity found in these things cannot itself be explained by the fact that there is a multiplicity of them. Multitude is “logically and ontologically posterior to unity,” meaning that for a multitude of beings to participate in unity, they must somehow be contained under one being separate from these beings, since they cannot themselves cause the unity between them. [6] The fact that goodness, truth, and being can be predicated in varying degrees of a multitude of beings cannot be attributed simply to the fact that there are many such beings.
  2. Second, the principle concerns finite beings. Of these the absolute perfections of being, truth, and goodness are predicated in an imperfect manner. [6] It cannot be said, for example, that a stone possesses the fullness of being, truth, or goodness. Therefore, being, truth, and goodness are said to be possessed in finite beings in a "composition of perfection and of a limited capacity for perfection." [6] Therefore, it can be said that the tree and the man possess different degrees of goodness, for example, according to each's limited capacity for perfection. So, a finite amount of goodness is found in each according to its capacity. (But goodness itself is not limited, and, as a concept, goodness has no imperfection.) If there is a composition of perfection and the limited capacity for it in some being, there must be a cause for this composition. [6] [7] In other words, predicating something as more or less implies that this thing is limited in its being. It does not exhaust the fullness of being, and therefore has its being per accidens: its act of being is not essential. [8] Therefore, any being which is predicated as being less or more is a limited being and has its act of being distinct from itself. It participates in being. Hence, there is a composition in such beings of perfection (being, truth, goodness) and the being’s nature (capacity for perfection). There must be a cause for this composition.
  3. Because “union that is effected according to either composition or similitude” cannot explain itself, there must be a “unity of a higher order.” [6] Therefore, there must exist some being which, because it exhausts what is to be, gives being to all limited things which participate in being. Goodness, being, and truth in finite beings must have a cause that is both efficient and exemplary. [6] St. Thomas adds that “the maximum of any genus is the cause of all that in that genus,” to indicate that the greatest in truth, goodness, and being is both the exemplar and efficient cause of all other things which display varying degrees of perfection, and so is “the cause of all beings.” [9] [6]

Causal structure of argument

Garrigou-Lagrange notes that it may appear that this fourth way “does not proceed by the way of causality” because it does not follow the same structure as the first three proofs. [10] Unlike the other proofs, it does not explicitly rely on the impossibility of an infinite, essentially ordered causal series. However, in the second article, St. Thomas has already asserted that the only way to prove the existence of God is from his effects, and it is only possible to conduct this proof based on the nature of causality. [11] Therefore, the fourth way is not a probabilistic argument. [8] It does not merely say that because degree is observed in things, it is likely that God exists as an “exemplar in this order” (the order of things that are good, true, and be). Instead, the fourth way proceeds from the necessity of a “supreme Good” as a cause, the “cause of other beings.” [10]

Aquinas explains, “If one of some kind is found as a common note in several objects, this must be because some one cause has brought it about in them.” [12] There cannot be multiple causes for this one note which proceed from the objects themselves. These objects are distinct from each other by nature, and therefore, if they were individual causes, they would produce different effects, rather than the same one effect. [12] Essentially, there must be one nature that produces this common note, rather than each producing it in themselves. Therefore, it is causally impossible for multiple diverse beings to share a common note (goodness, being, or truth) with each as the cause of this note.

By the same principle, “if anything is found to be participated in various degrees by several objects,” the objects which are said to possess more or less perfection cannot contain in themselves the fullness of perfection, or predication of more or less would be meaningless. [12] Consequently, among these imperfect things, the varying degrees of perfection found in them cannot be attributable to themselves. Instead, it must be attributed to some common cause apart from them, since again, if this were not so, a diversity of effects would be observed issuing from the naturally distinct objects, rather than the one participated perfection. It is causally impossible for multiple imperfect objects which participate in perfection to cause this perfection in themselves.  

Therefore, there must be one object which possesses this perfection in the highest degree and which is the source of the perfection in the others. Thus, the fourth way “proves the necessity of a maximum in being,” or a Being without a composition of perfection and limited capacity for perfection. [13]

Applications of argument

Garrigou-Lagrange then considers the various ways Aquinas applied this argument to the intellect, truth, goodness, and the natural law.

  1. Humans have intellectual souls. They are called such “by reason of a participation in the intellectual power”: it is not wholly intellectual. Secondly, the human soul is distinct from intellectual power as such because it reaches understanding of truth by reasoning, which implies motion. Therefore, the human intellectual soul, because it is participatory (imperfect) and “in motion,” must depend on a higher intellect, which is “the self-subsisting Being.” [14]
  2. It is possible to discern truths that are necessary and universal, such as the principle of contradiction. This absolute necessity, however, requires an “actually existing and necessary foundation.” [14] There must therefore exist an absolutely necessary and eternal foundation, in the “first Truth as in the universal Cause that contains all truth,” the maximum truth. [15] For example, the principle of contradiction is a law which governs all real beings. Since a multitude cannot explain unity, the foundation of this truth cannot issue from “either contingent being or in the different natures of contingent beings.” [16] Likewise, the natural law is not caused by a multitude of beings who indicate it, but by “participation of the eternal law.” [17]
  3. The fourth proof is also applied to the argument from desire for the existence of God. Because “more and less are predicated of different goods,” if there is a natural appetite for the universal good in the things of nature, and good is not in the mind but in things, there must be a universal or most perfect good. [16] Otherwise, this natural desire would be a “psychological contraction.” Thus, the argument from desire is based on the fourth proof and the principle that “every agent acts for an end, and that a natural desire cannot be purposeless.” [18]

Syllogistic form

A syllogistic form collected by Robert J. Schihl follows:

  1. Objects have properties to greater or lesser extents.
  2. If an object has a property to a lesser extent, then there exists some other object that has the property to the maximum possible degree.
  3. So there is an entity that has all properties to the maximum possible degree.
  4. Hence God exists. [19]

A second syllogistic form:

  1. Objects are said to be less or more concerning being, goodness, and truth.
  2. To predicate these things in this manner necessarily analyzes them as limited.
  3. Limited beings participate in being.
  4. Anything that participates in being is contingent upon a cause outside itself for its being.
  5. A series of things participating in being reduces to a cause that does not participate in being.
  6. A cause that does not participate in being is being itself.
  7. This is called God. [8]

Notes

  1. "Henological argument".
  2. Blackburn, Simon (1996-05-23). "Degrees of perfection argument". Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Oxford University Press. ISBN   0-19-283134-8.
  3. Medieval Sourcebook: Aquinas: Proof of the Existence of God
  4. Medieval Sourcebook: Thomas Aquinas: Reasons in Proof of the Existence of God, 1270. University of Massachusetts Lowell. Archived from the original in 2020.
  5. 1 2 Garrigou-Lagrange, Réginald, 1877-1964. (1943). The one God : a commentary on the first part of St. Thomas' Theological summa. B Herder Book Co. p. 146.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  6. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Garrigou Lagrange, Reginald (1877-1964). (1943). The one God : a commentary on the first part of St. Thomas' Theological Summa. B. Herder Book Co. p. 146.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  7. Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologiae. Ia, q.3, a.7.
  8. 1 2 3 Broussard, Karl. "Aquinas' 4th proof for God's existence." Pints with Aquinas, Sept. 2018.
  9. Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologiae. Ia, q.2, a.3.
  10. 1 2 Garrigou Lagrange, Reginald (1877-1964). (1943). The one God : a commentary on the first part of St. Thomas' Theological Summa. B. Herder Book Co. p. 147.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  11. Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologiae. Ia, q.2, a.2.
  12. 1 2 3 Aquinas, Thomas. Quaestiones disputatae de potentia Dei. q.3 a.5.
  13. Garrigou Lagrange, Reginald (1877-1964). (1943). The one God : a commentary on the first part of St. Thomas' Theological Summa. B. Herder Book Co. p. 148.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  14. 1 2 Garrigou-Lagrange, Reginald. (1943). The One God. B. Herder Book Co. p. 148.
  15. Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Contra Gentiles. Bk II, chap. 84
  16. 1 2 Garrigou-Lagrange, Reginald. (1943). The One God. B. Herder Book Co. p. 149.
  17. Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologiae. Ia IIae, q.91, a.2.
  18. Garrigou-Lagrange, Reginald. The One God. Translated by Dom. Bede Rose, O.S.B., S.T.D., B. Herder Book Co, 1943, p. 150
  19. Aquinas'/Anselm's Arguments in Syllogistic Form Archived February 20, 2007, at the Wayback Machine

Related Research Articles

A cosmological argument, in natural theology, is an argument which claims that the existence of God can be inferred from facts concerning causation, explanation, change, motion, contingency, dependency, or finitude with respect to the universe or some totality of objects. A cosmological argument can also sometimes be referred to as an argument from universal causation, an argument from first cause, the causal argument, or prime mover argument. Whichever term is employed, there are two basic variants of the argument, each with subtle yet important distinctions: in esse (essentiality), and in fieri (becoming).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Omnipotence</span> Quality of having unlimited power

Omnipotence is the quality of having unlimited power. Monotheistic religions generally attribute omnipotence only to the deity of their faith. In the monotheistic religious philosophy of Abrahamic religions, omnipotence is often listed as one of God's characteristics, along with omniscience, omnipresence, and omnibenevolence. The presence of all these properties in a single entity has given rise to considerable theological debate, prominently including the problem of evil, the question of why such a deity would permit the existence of evil. It is accepted in philosophy and science that omnipotence can never be effectively understood.

Theological virtues are virtues associated in Christian theology and philosophy with salvation resulting from the grace of God. Virtues are traits or qualities which dispose one to conduct oneself in a morally good manner. Traditionally the theological virtues have been named Faith, Hope, and Charity (Love). They are coupled with the natural or cardinal virtues and opposed to the seven deadly sins.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Divine simplicity</span> View of God without parts or features

In classical theistic and monotheistic theology, the doctrine of Divine Simplicity says that God is simple.

According to divine illumination, the process of human thought needs to be aided by divine grace. It is the oldest and most influential alternative to naturalism in the theory of mind and epistemology. It was an important feature of ancient Greek philosophy, Neoplatonism, medieval philosophy, and the Illuminationist school of Islamic philosophy.

<i>Critique of Pure Reason</i> 1781 book by Immanuel Kant

The Critique of Pure Reason is a book by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant, in which the author seeks to determine the limits and scope of metaphysics. Also referred to as Kant's "First Critique", it was followed by his Critique of Practical Reason (1788) and Critique of Judgment (1790). In the preface to the first edition, Kant explains that by a "critique of pure reason" he means a critique "of the faculty of reason in general, in respect of all knowledge after which it may strive independently of all experience" and that he aims to reach a decision about "the possibility or impossibility of metaphysics". The term "critique" is understood to mean a systematic analysis in this context, rather than the colloquial sense of the term.

The existence of God is a subject of debate in theology, the philosophy of religion, and popular culture. A wide variety of arguments for and against the existence of God can be categorized as logical, empirical, metaphysical, subjective or scientific. In philosophical terms, the question of the existence of God involves the disciplines of epistemology and ontology and the theory of value.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Thomism</span> Philosophical system

Thomism is the philosophical and theological school which arose as a legacy of the work and thought of Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274), the Dominican philosopher, theologian, and Doctor of the Church.

The absence of good, also known as the privation theory of evil, is a theological and philosophical doctrine that evil, unlike good, is insubstantial, so that thinking of it as an entity is misleading. Instead, evil is rather the absence, or lack ("privation"), of good. This also means that everything that exists is good, insofar as it exists; and is also sometimes stated as that evil ought to be regarded as nothing, or as something non-existent.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Best of all possible worlds</span> Concept in metaphysics

The phrase "the best of all possible worlds" was coined by the German polymath and Enlightenment philosopher Gottfried Leibniz in his 1710 work Essais de Théodicée sur la bonté de Dieu, la liberté de l'homme et l'origine du mal, more commonly known simply as the Theodicy. The claim that the actual world is the best of all possible worlds is the central argument in Leibniz's theodicy, or his attempt to solve the problem of evil.

<i>Summa Theologica</i> Theological treatise by Thomas Aquinas

The Summa Theologiae or Summa Theologica, often referred to simply as the Summa, is the best-known work of Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274), a scholastic theologian and Doctor of the Church. It is a compendium of all of the main theological teachings of the Catholic Church, intended to be an instructional guide for theology students, including seminarians and the literate laity. Presenting the reasoning for almost all points of Christian theology in the West, topics of the Summa follow the following cycle: God; Creation, Man; Man's purpose; Christ; the Sacraments; and back to God.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Five Ways (Aquinas)</span> Aquinas arguments that there is a real God

The Quinque viæ are five logical arguments for the existence of God summarized by the 13th-century Catholic philosopher and theologian Thomas Aquinas in his book Summa Theologica. They are:

  1. the argument from "first mover";
  2. the argument from universal causation;
  3. the argument from contingency;
  4. the argument from degree;
  5. the argument from final cause or ends.
<i>Actus purus</i>

In scholastic philosophy, Actus Purus is the absolute perfection of God.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange</span> French theologian

Réginald Marie Garrigou-Lagrange was a French Dominican friar, philosopher and theologian. Garrigou-Lagrange was a neo-Thomist theologian, recognized along with Édouard Hugon and Martin Grabmann as distinguished theologians of the 20th century. As professor at the Pontifical University of Saint Thomas Aquinas, he taught dogmatic and spiritual theology in Rome from 1909 to 1959. There he wrote The Three Ages of the Interior Life in 1938.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Thomistic sacramental theology</span>

Thomistic sacramental theology is St. Thomas Aquinas's theology of the sacraments of the Catholic Church. It can be found through his writings in the 13th-century works Summa contra Gentiles and in the Summa Theologiæ.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Thomas Aquinas</span> Italian Dominican theologian (1225–1274)

Thomas Aquinas was an Italian Dominican friar and priest, an influential philosopher and theologian, and a jurist in the tradition of scholasticism from the county of Aquino in the Kingdom of Sicily.

<i>The Three Ages of the Interior Life</i> Book by Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange

The Three Ages of the Interior Life: Prelude of Eternal Life is the magnum opus of Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, a French theologian of the Order of Preachers. The two-volume publication represents both the summary of teaching ascetical and mystical theology for twenty years at the Angelicum and the synthesis of two other works: Christian Perfection and Contemplation and L’amour de Dieu et la croix de Jesus. The work is framed according to three stages that mark the common path of Christian perfection, which are described in conformity to the preexisting theology and wisdom of Catholic saints and Church Fathers. His synthesis has become one of the most the dominant present-day interpretations of this patrimony.

An ontological argument is a philosophical argument, made from an ontological basis, that is advanced in support of the existence of God. Such arguments tend to refer to the state of being or existing. More specifically, ontological arguments are commonly conceived a priori in regard to the organization of the universe, whereby, if such organizational structure is true, God must exist.

De libero arbitrio voluntatis, often shortened to De libero arbitrio, is a book by Augustine of Hippo which seeks to resolve the problem of evil in Christianity by asserting that free will is the cause of all suffering. The first of its three volumes was completed in 388; the second and third were written between 391 and 395. The work is structured as a dialogue between Augustine and his companion Evodius; it ranges over several topics, and includes an attempted proof of the existence of God.

Instrumentality is a theological theory that falls under the broader category of the prophetic model of biblical inspiration. Those who espouse the prophetic model consider the authors of all the books of the bible to have been inspired in the same way prophets have been inspired by God to preach. Although, as Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange notes, a prophet can act based on direct revelation from God or from inspiration.