!

!
!
!
!
The Man of God: Thomas Aquinas
Maxwell Schoenfeld
PHIL - 1000 - 016
Alexander Izrailevsky
11 - 23 - 2014
http://maxwellschoenfeld.weebly.com/e-portfolio.html

!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!

!
!
!
!
!
Thomas Aquinas: The Method Man
To review the life of a man devoutly committed to religion is something I previously
wouldve called absurd. For quite a long period of time, I havent had any interest in religious
studies whatsoever, and I actively avoided any mention or discussion in regard to it. However,
upon researching Thomas Aquinas, I found myself enamored with not his beliefs, but his passion
and ability to defend them, and as he states in the description of the Three Beautiful Sisters any
contention should be met with an attempt at understanding. Aquinas is an extremely methodical
thinker, one who utilizes good form, or defining a clear and rational line from one point to
another. For the duration of this analysis, the majority of his thought process will be referred to
as the employment of hierarchies. The topics Ive chosen to discuss in this paper are that of his
Apologetics, his Six Levels of Human Knowledge, and his portrayal of the Three Beautiful
sisters, beginning with the former.
These Three Beautiful Sisters are introduced to us by Thomas in order of their hierarchy.
The importance of this hierarchy is that it dictates the validity of each level (i.e. any issue is
dealt with and proved/disproved by the highest known level). Forming the base of this hierarchy
is what Thomas refers to as Science Facts, or what I can only infer to be are the findings and
experimentation conducted by scientific officials, not necessarily facts confirmed by a scientific

method as the idea of the scientific method had not been discovered at this point in time.
Following Science Facts, we now move onto Philosophical logic. It seems to me that this level
presents some debate and possible contention; it poses a threat to both Scientific Fact and the
next level Religious Revelation, in that the cornerstone and nature of philosophical logic is to
question everything. Our final level in this hierarchy is Religious revelation. While my own
views and the views of Aquinas may not entirely align, I thoroughly understand this point based
solely on the factor of belief, which I believe to be the most volatile force that humanity posses.
Again, Thomas Aquinas presents to us another structure, another scale, this time in the
form of the levels of human knowledge, of which there are six levels. I think that it is worth
noting that while this is indeed another hierarchy, the position of the levels does not necessarily
portray their overall importance, only that of their ranking in the scale of human knowledge.
Here we see that the position of the base level of human knowledge is that of common sense,
followed closely by the second level of science, following the trend first submitted by the notion
of the Three Beautiful Sisters. Following these two levels are the next two, Philosophy and
Theology, which I believe to be more or less mutually inclusive; they are in essence the study of
the ways we do, can, and have conducted ourselves, and the in depth discussion and analysis of
human nature on a moral and ethical level. Our final two levels are again somewhat essential to
each other. Without the fifth level, The Dogmatic Interpretation of the Church, the mere idea of
even understanding the sixth and final aspect, Revelation, would be futile.
What is widely regarded as the magnum opus of Aquinas is that of his Apologetics, or his
Five proofs of Gods Existence (a common mistake is that of referring to his Five Proofs as his
five apologetics; Apologetics is the practice of systematically defending a position). In this

instance, these proofs are void of hierarchy. Instead, they opt to be portrayed as arguments of his
apologetics, so that they may create a foundation for this aspect of his philosophy. These five
arguments are the Argument of Movement, the Cosmological argument, the Argument of
Necessity, the argument of Graduation, and finally, the Teleological argument. As stated above,
there is no order to these arguments; there are more so pillars of his apologetics, each one
doing its part in providing and presenting evidence of Gods existence and eloquently explaining
its inner workings and functions.
Our initial argument is that of movement. To offer an example, a trade ship sets out from
Sicily with goods destined for Malta. Halfway through their journey, a storm occurs, that
eventually devastates the ship, its crew, and the cargo it was carrying, sending all of the above to
the bottom of the Mediterranean Sea. One of the first questions one might ask is what causes the
storm that brews the sea, kills the sailors, and eventually disrupts the economy of the city that
said ships cargo was to aid? Abandoning meteorological explanations, Aquinas states that the
very first mover, the initial agent of action is God himself. He moves the universe, the world that
surrounds us, even the wind and the rain that ended the voyage of those sailors. Every single
aspect of nature is propelled by God, with the exception of humanity, which utilizes the tool of
free will (the notion of free will and its moral exploitation will be expanded upon in the section
of The Problem of Evil.) A more simplified example of his actions are that of waves in a pool of
water. The second that an object is dropped into a still body of water, ripples and waves are
formed, traveling to the very edge. To identify the genesis of these waves, one can easily trace
them back to the initial object that caused them, as Aquinas does with the initial actions of God.

Our next argument is seemingly akin to our previous argument, the differences residing
within the fundamentals of themselves. This argument is the Cosmological argument, an
argument reliant upon Causation. Whereas the argument of movement describes the literal
actions and movements set forth by God, the cosmological argument is more so explanation
oriented. It states, simply, that everything that begins to exist must have a cause or creator. This
argument is honestly one of, if not the most peaceful argument in my humble opinion, as it is the
closest possible thing to unifying the world of science and religion. An example: some day in the
near future, the Big Bang is scientifically confirmed. Aquinas would, at this point, still call for a
cause or a progenitor of the Big Bang itself, again finding himself at the conclusion that God is
the initial cause of the universe itself.
The next argument we find ourselves at is the argument of Necessity. This argument is
existence oriented in nature, much like the Cosmological argument. However, the argument of
Necessity differs in that its fundamentals are more concrete in nature. It dictates that the
universe is comprised of a sum total, or finite amount of physical things. Every individual
component or thing is at least to some degree accidental. Yet regardless of their accidental
status, they still continue to exist and be. Logically, some creator or being must be responsible
for their generation and their following existence. Here we find ourselves arriving at the
conclusion of God as the Absolute Necessary Being. Interestingly enough, based on this
evidence an argument could be made that, given the existence of God, God must be accidental in
and of himself. In this instance that God differs from this case (as the Cosmological argument
proves to some extent) we can then assume that god exists outside the realm of existing.

The second to last argument is that of the argument of Graduation, which I find to be
rather beautiful. Aquinas states with, given review of the previous arguments, obvious logic that
God is the most perfect being, the paramount of goodness. What follows next is another scale,
this time hinging upon factors and degrees of goodness. While the measurements are not
distinctively outlined, they are observable in the eyes of Aquinas. While one may draw parallels
to the studies of evolution, the argument of Graduation varies in that our graduation solely relies
upon a beings state of perfection. The degree of perfection not static, but like the Buddhistic
levels of enlightenment, a great difficulty of effort and change is required to alter it or increase it.
Again returning to the notion of a scale, for a scale to exist at all, there must be an absolute low,
and an absolute high, with God residing at the highest point of the scale.
Finally we find ourselves arriving at the last argument, The Teleological argument. First
and foremost, one must address a basic concept as to provide an example to back this argument:
The sun sets, and the moon rises, and visa versa. These entities are void of any intelligence and
cognitive processes, yet we can observe them participating in a consistent activity. Aquinas
suggests that this consistency cannot occur without design or action, much like a pen cannot
write without the writer. Aquinas states with absolute certainty that something or some being
must be accountable for safekeeping and guiding the occurrences of the universe. If we
incorporate the past four arguments (i.e. the scale provided in the argument from Graduation), we
can easily arrive at an outcome that proves God as the master of design, the keeper of order and
balance. God alone sits atop the hierarchy of everything that is encompassed by our universe.
In addition to these points, one may question the notion of evil. It is extremely easy, and
extremely unfortunate to observe the wrongdoings of human nature and mankind. Theft, murder,

genocide, and oppression are all acts that humans have participated in at various stages of our
history. How can a kind, compassionate, and caring being such as God allow for all of these
atrocities committed through the centuries? The beautiful, almost tragic answer given to us by
Aquinas is our own free will, a tool that frees and separates us from creatures of unwitting
obedience. Aquinas proposes that we are blessed with a gift, one that even allows us to question
his very existence. Coming to a conclusion, we can logically assume that the nature of evil, the
derivation of all the horrors we are capable of is simply an abuse of the gift of our creator.
The apologetics of Aquinas, his six levels of human knowledge, and the three sisters are
what I believe to be perfect examples of a genius in terms of methodical thinking. His
employment of varying levels, degrees and scales, and logical processes and conclusions are
unprecedented and without a doubt groundbreaking for a man of his time. Suffice to say, while I
myself am not religious, I still find myself able to time and time again be inspired by the thought
process of this man; although his work is intended to be viewed and understood in a religious
light, the impact it has on me is derived from the nature of Aquinas himself. He is, in every sense
of the word, passionate, and through this attempt at understanding his passion, I am profoundly
inspired and excited by a field that I previously wouldve disregarded.