Sunday, March 4, 2012
Aquinas vs. Dawkins
Religion has and will always be a hot topic. It is one that has been argued both ways between the believes and the non-believers. Thomas Aquinas' argues that there are five reasons that God must exist. I think the argument that he presented gave Richard Dawkins a lot of ammunition to shoot holes through his claims. The first three of the five ways "the existence of God can be proved" are so similar that they could be combined into one reason. Presenting a weak argument may cause the audience to question the knowledge the author has on the topic. If you wish to write a piece on a topic that is highly controversial it is important to put forth a dynamite argument. If non-believes were so easy to convince they would be believers already. Aquinas may have rebuted Dawkins by stating that he used reason to back up each of his claims.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I know what you mean. Religion is like one of those topics like abortion or politics that you would not want to bring up in a normal conversation unless you want to get into a heated argument that will probably end up going no where. When looking at Dawkins article, it did seem very weak because he was not able to show enough proof to explain how everything came to be. That was a main reason as to why I did not agree with what he was saying. Unlike in Aquinas’ article, he was able to prove the existence of God and showed numerous facts as to why someone should believe it.
ReplyDelete