Metaphysics and the Existence of God
Metaphysics refers to a branch of philosophy that studies the life of being. For instance, it explores the presence of the universe, God, identity, space, and time. This paper will discuss if God exists because of the first motion. Also, the essay will use "metaphysics" to support the theory of God being real and being the reason for the action and find out if there are counter-arguments to this theory and who created God. Hence, the doctrine of the existence of God has been argued upon by philosophers over an extended period. While some shy away from the topic, other philosophers say that it is necessary to study the existence of God.
The Study of Metaphysics
The subject matters for the study of metaphysics are the "being as such", the first causes of things, and something which does not change. Hence, the theory is used to explain if God is real. Nonetheless, there have been extensive arguments on the existence of God and the nature of the Cosmos because of the purposive intelligence of the work done in the cosmos. However, some argue that God is omniscient, benevolent and omnipotent. Other, arguments are based on the religious perspective of individuals. For instance, the religious intellectuals have built their cases on rational rather than the existing alternatives. If the contemporary outlook agrees with the Christian perspective, then there could be the need for the change of religious viewpoint. Moreover, the existence of God is fundamental in every religion with some arguing that it complements science. The reformed epistemology contends that the presence of God among people hence the sense of God is a place in the minds of people. According to Antony Flew (1984) the debate on the burden of proof lies with the theist. However, some believe that the existence of God lies with the theists and atheists.
The Argument of God's Existence Based on Motion
God existence built upon the principle of motion is argued out on the analysis of movement. The first argument that God exists in action is the fact that our senses can feel things that are in motion. Aristotle first came with the case that God exists in the movement because everything can move from one place to another. For instance, it is common knowledge that things are in motion and human beings can sense and recognize them. The fact that things move came as a result of driving by themselves and being pushed. The thing which is moved is run by something else with the eventual mover being unmoved. The unmoved mover is God. If transferred to infinity, he is an unmarked mover.
According to Aristotle, if something moves by itself, then it must follow the principle of its motion; otherwise, it is being driven by another. Hence, anything has to be run before getting into action. Therefore, when one part is at rest, the others must be in motion. Another proposition of movement is that if something moves by accident, it must have been run by another. Therefore, something which is driven by accident is not touched by itself thus the force applied can be by accident either by nature or violent reaction. In the third proposition, the action cannot be in potency or act once.
The analysis of the argument is that things move after a potential move is exerted on it. Plato has his reservations about the ability of words to transfer. Although he agrees with Aristotle on the strength of things to move, his views on movement were a bit broader. Aristotle believed that motion exists strictly on potency which belonged only to divisible bodies just like in physics. However, Plato asserted that anything exerting pressure on itself is not a body. Hence, Plato understood any given operation as a motion. Thus, judging and moving are motion themselves. Equally, Plato realized that for anything to run by itself, it has to have the will to do so. Therefore, there is no challenge for the first being that can move by itself which leads to an argument of reaching the first being that is unmoved as argued by Aristotle.
Another proposition is that things that move do not proceed to infinity because the movers and the things that are being moved have to end somewhere. Aristotle argued that movable bodies are divisible and hence they have to move to infinity, and the infinity must be bodies or beings. Therefore, all infinite things must move in motion leading to infinite bodies being run in infinite times. Practically, movers cannot move countless bodies over infinite times as proved by physics. For things to move together, they must exist simultaneously which is impossible except when they constitute continuity. Ultimately, one infinite body moves infinitely.
Further, other arguments explain that for things to move in motion there must be an initiator who is the mover. Once the mover stops, the infinite bodies also stop running. Hence this explanation stipulates that fast things must have existed first before movers. The solid bodies explain that God first lived in motion. Another proposition is that a mover can move by itself as a whole which proves that bodies in motion can exist in action and potency. Hence, the self-moved mover will continue to run by itself which brings to the initial conclusion that there is an existence of an unmoved mover (Menn 570).
In the case of animals, they are self-moved beings which are unmoved by the soul. Hence, the soul proves the argument of Aristotle that "the first being was moved by accident and unmoved by itself." Moreover, Aristotle presupposes that motion is everlasting hence there must be an endless moving being that exists in all generations. Thus, the movers or bodies that move by themselves cannot be pushed through accident or by themselves (Menn 563).
In the case of God, Aristotle illustrates that God is not a self-moving mover but rather an absolute mover. God is, therefore, a perfect first mover who is unmoved by anything. In the metaphysics, there is an argument that there must be a cause for anything thus for the first mover to mover, there must have been a cause. Equally, when you discuss a cause, there must be an effect which is the motion.
Also, Aristotle presupposes that anything real is right to being and anything false is false. Thus, the observation that there exists a supreme being is correct, and this being is God. From this argument, the assumption links to the existence of the government and subjects hence; there must be a supreme being that watches over the world, and that is God (Thomas and Aquinas 78).
St. Thomas Aquinas and the Existence of God
St. Thomas Aquinas arguments that God exists because of the first motions based on our sense which proves that things live in action. For example, human beings can move from one place to another. The mover of this motion is the soul as they are unmoved by self. Also, he argues that things move when the actual movement comes from the potential proposal. Equally, the only motion that can translate the natural motion to action is the actual motion. Further, the argument proceeds that no activity can be potential and real at the same time hence for anything to move, there must be motion. Accordingly, anything inaction is driven by something else, and objects cannot move to infinity. Thus, it is essential to introduce the first mover who put things in motion, and this mover is God (Kenny 6).
Counter-Arguments and the Question of God's Creation
The counter-argument that God first existed in motion is the cause and effect of the first mover. For every action, there must be an equal and opposite reaction. The pertinent question in this argument is that if indeed there was a cause, what might have propelled the first cause. Besides, if there is an argument that the primary objective was caused by nothing and God exists in motion, it would be prudent to consider that the world has always lived and it shall continue to exist in an infinite period. As a result, there will be an endless cycle of contraction and expansion. Hence, the counter-argument illustrates that a supreme being does not necessarily have to exist for things to occur in the world. Further, in the counter-argument, if human beings are to accept that God first existed in motion, there is nothing in the world to show because properties in the world are attached to human beings. Hence, there is no satisfactory argument on the God exists in motion (MacIntyre 73).
The most significant question asked in the counter-argument is if the force behind the causation is the effect of motion. Also, the forces behind the contraction and expansion are unknown, and this leads to a question of who created God. Such an explanation can bring an expression on the sequence of events, the series of motion as they exist and not necessary and the existence of being that caused all the movements. Therefore, there must be a being that created the presence of things as they happen.
The reason as to why God first existed in motion is that things must change and the action must be brought about by something which does not change. Equally, nothing can cause change by itself, and therefore there must be a potential force to create the actual move. Also, when something breaks, it must have been brought by something, and the sequence of change cannot be infinite because they must end somewhere. Consequently, nobody created God because he is a supreme being who is all-powerful.
Conclusion
Hence, God first existence in motion is argued out by philosophers and religious leaders. Some of the prominent philosophers who explained the existence of God in action are Aristotle and Plato while the most remarkable spiritual leader to discuss the existence of God is St. Thomas Aquinas. The essay has elaborately explained the theory supporting the existence of God through metaphysics, the reason for motion, counter-arguments, and who created God. Thus, God is a supreme being who first existed in action.
Works Cited
Kenny, Anthony. Five Ways: St Thomas Aquinas Vo. Routledge, 2014.
MacIntyre Alasdair. God, philosophy, universities: a Selective History of the Catholic Philosophical Tradition. Rowman " Littlefield Publishers, 2009.
Menn Stephen. "Aristotle and Plato on God as Nous and as the Good." The Review of Metaphysics, Mar. 1992, pp. 543-573.
Thomas, Kenneth W., and Aquinas Thomas Thomas. Commentary on Aristotle's Physics. A"C Black, 2003.
