Aquinus

Name
Instructor
Course
Date
Aquinas argument from motion
The argument from motion by Aquinas has its empirical observation of motion in the world. He sought to prove the existence of first mover thro ugh cosmological arguments known as t he five ways. He drew his arguments upon the existence of motion in an effort to explain the existence of God, which appears to be logical and sophisticated. His arguments in relation to motion and existence of God have objections as motion fails to prove the existence of first mover. His domino is defined as the single event capable of setting a chain reaction of events (Renick, 45). He argued that in order for some thing to move there must be a first order for the occurrence of the reaction.
The existence of motion is drawn on the argument to prove the existence of God though there are objections within the premise despite their logic and sophistication. His inspirations are drawn from Aristotelian physics that studies motion in physical world. His observation was that some objects were in motion, and to move does not reflect physical movement, but the change of potential status to actuality state.
Aquinas nest premise states that objects which are in motion must be set in motion by other preceding objects. This indicates that there is nothing which is capable of moving without an outside force. Aquinas third premise stated that the re is no infinite number of movers and moves but there must be a first mover. The objects in motion the world over have to be set in motion by another object. This is an asserting that nothing in the world that can generate itself in motion. He thus, concluded that there is a first unmoved mover and this deduces to prove the existence of God.
The objection with regard to Aquinas arguments on claims that nothing in the natural world that have t he free will to set itself in motion. This contradicts the undergoing of natural decay in atoms as they result from internal processes rather than external forces. The phenomena of motion with respect to Aquinas argument has been replaced with the big bang theory thus replacing the word God in his argument. Aquinas premise are contradicting as premise two excludes the application of the first mover indicating that even the first mover would require a first mover to set it in motion.
The claim in the third premise that there could be no infinite movers and moves faults his argument because it is an assumption that there was no infinite anything (Shinnick). The contradiction in this premise is that if the first mover needs to have a mover this would lead to an infinite amount of time and this deduce the assumption that there is no particular period when motion will cease (Davis, 49). The incapability of motion having a definite end has an assertion of not having a definite beginning creat...