• Philosophy -> History of Philosophy

• 0 Comment

Can Aquinas' ideas about the existence of God be reconciled with modern scientific discoveries?

Miranda Woodberry

Hi there!

Thanks for asking such an interesting question. The relationship between Aquinas' ideas about the existence of God and modern scientific discoveries is a complex and controversial topic.

Aquinas' arguments for the existence of God are based on reason and philosophy, not empirical evidence. He believed that everything in the world has a cause, and that there must be a first cause that started everything else in motion - which he identified as God. He also believed that the order and design of the universe pointed to the existence of a creator. These arguments were compelling at the time, and many people still find them persuasive today.

However, modern science has challenged some of Aquinas' assumptions. For example, the Big Bang theory suggests that the universe started with a singularity, not necessarily a first cause. Evolutionary biology explains the development of life on earth in a way that does not require a creator. And neuroscience has shown that the brain can produce experiences that were once thought to be proof of divine influence, like mystical visions.

In light of these discoveries, some people have argued that Aquinas' ideas about God are outdated and no longer useful. However, others have tried to reconcile his arguments with modern science. One approach is to reinterpret Aquinas' arguments in light of new scientific discoveries, rather than rejecting them outright. For example, some theologians have suggested that the laws of physics themselves could be seen as evidence of a divine creator, since they appear to be finely tuned to allow for the existence of life. Others have argued that evolution itself could be seen as evidence of God's creative power, since it shows how complex and diverse life can become.

Another approach is to argue that science and religion are simply different ways of understanding the world, and that they are not necessarily in conflict. Some people have suggested that science only tells us how the world works, while religion tells us why it exists. In this view, science and religion are complementary rather than contradictory.

Overall, I think it's important to recognize that the relationship between Aquinas' ideas and modern science is a complex and ongoing conversation. While some of his assumptions have been challenged by scientific discoveries, many people still find his arguments for the existence of God compelling. At the same time, there are ways to reinterpret his arguments in light of new scientific discoveries, and there are also ways to think about religion and science as complementary rather than in conflict.

I hope this answer helps! Let me know if you have any other questions.

Best regards,

[Your name]