St. Thomas Aquinas devised five ways in which God is proven to be real; the first of which states that God is proven due to the motion of objects and bodies. Aquinas describes motion as “the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality”, giving the example that something like fire, which is actually hot, can change and move that which is cold but “potentially” hot (like a piece of wood), but that it itself cannot be “potentially” hot. This argument relies on three basic claims: First, he claims that, because every action results from another, if followed back to infinity, something had to move first. Secondly, it is impossible for something to move on its own accord. Third, the “first mover” starting the chain reaction of …show more content…
His first premise that something had to be the first body/object to move is generally assumed to be true. However, it is not certain that there was a “beginning” at all. No thought experiment can prove the existence of a time that was not witnessed or recorded, nor can it prove or describe events or the behavior of bodies in such vast distances of time. For the premise that it is impossible for an object to move itself, one has to look no further than life itself to see people, animals, and microorganisms moving on their own free will without being pushed along by outside forces. On a more basic level, a knowledge of basic physics reveals the concept of temperature, which is the measure of the movement and vibrations of subatomic particles. They move due to energy transference, even in the coldest of conditions (except absolute zero, but that is impossible to achieve) and even without outside influence. Third, Aquinas lets his unwavering belief in God define the entity or object that is the “first mover”. Assuming there was a “beginning” in time and movement that does not depend on nature, why would Aquinas’s definition of the God deity be the correct