« Ch.IV. Q.29. Moral Argument | Main | Ch.IV. Q.31. The Cumulative Force of Theistic Arguments »
July 27, 2005
Ch.IV. Q.30. Inductions from the Finite
THE things which we see in the visible universe about us are all Unites — i.e., they are externally limited, and are what they are in relation to something other than themselves. This is true of the totality of finites as well as of particular things. But the finite and relative implies what is not finite and not relative — some standard which is the measure of all things, and in relation to which all things are what they are, but which requires nothing except itself for its own measurement or determination. God alone satisfies this requirement.1
2. Wherever there is any degree of being, perfection or beauty to be found, we instinctively and necessarily interpret it or measure it by assuming the existence of an absolute and infinite standard. If this standard has no counterpart in reality our interpretations are the veriest "fabric of a dream." The existence of the Infinite — of God — is then the implicate and validating presupposition of all intelligence, without which we can interpret nothing and think nothing.2
3. The imperfect implies the perfect, and wherever we discern imperfect power, beauty, and goodness, we discern their imperfection because we also discern perhaps without noting it, that a reality which comprehends their perfection is partially reflected in them. We cannot deny the existence of that perfect reality without denying the imperfection which we discern.3
4. Similarly the temporal and contingent implies the eternal and non-contingent, the spatial that which has no spatial measure. Nor may we confound the eternal with the temporal, or the infinite with the spatial; for by so doing we deny what we see, that all temporals and spatials have by nature external limits, and fail to fill out the standard which is presupposed in our estimate of them.4
5. So it is with the moveable, wherein mutable spatial and temporal relations converge. We can give no meaning to a change in space and time relations without at least implicit reference to that which changes in neither. But the more we study the face of nature the more we may assure ourselves that nothing finite is thus immovable. The ultimate involved in motion is the Infinite — the unmoved Mover of all.5
1 This line of argument—the method of invention— underlies Gratry's Introd. to the Knowledge of God. Note esp. pp. 23-25. It is found in what Plato calls dialectic; and is used by St. Anselm, Monologium, ch. i.-iv.; cf. Ilingworth, Personality, pp. 89-92.
2 St. Anselm, ch. ii.; Cousin, in Caldecott and Mackin¬tosh, Selections, pp. 309-315.
3 St. Thos., Summa, I., ii. 3 quarta; St. Augustine, De Trinitate, VIII., iv., v.; St. Anselm, ch. i.
4 Wilhelm and Scannell, Manual, Vol. I., pp. 195-197; Flint, Theism, p. 432; St. Thos., I., ii. 3 tertia.
5 St. Thos., I. ii. 3 prima; Aristotle, Physics, Bk. viii.; Metaphysics, Bk. xi.
Posted by Debra Bullock at July 27, 2005 11:11 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://disseminary.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/475