[lbo-talk] Atheism

[C. G. Estabrook]

Thomas never quite calls them proofs (and rejects as unsound the so-called
ontological argument) -- in part because he doesn't think God "exists" as
things do (i.e., if you made a complete list of everything in the
universe, the list would not properly include "God.")  In context (Summa
theologiae 1.2.3), he suggests five ways ("viae") that the universe by its
existence poses a problem (roughly, "How come?").  The answer -- which he
insists is literally unknowable -- "this, we call God" (et hoc dicimus
deum).  --CGE

On Fri, 26 Dec 2003, Jon Johanning wrote:
> 
> ...By "Aristotelians," I assume you mean "Thomists." The problem I see
> in them is that, while they loudly celebrate their patron saint's
> acute reasonings, they swallow, for example, his "proofs for the
> existence of God" whole, which makes me very dubious about their
> ability to evaluate philosophical arguments for their soundness :-) .
>