Classical Theism, Philosophy, and Religion Forum / "Objections to St Thomas Aquinas' First Way (The Unmoved Mover)"

**Posted by Gary** 6/24/2018 7:48 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJzCYqiLWt0
Do you think any of these objections have any merit? The objection that he gives the most credence to is that Aquinas rests his argument on Aristotle's metaphysics which is inextricably tied to his physics and that his physics has been overthrown. What is the best way to show someone that Aristotle's metaphysics can be isolated from his physics and that Aquinas' first way and can still go through successfully to an unmoved mover without assuming all of the details of Aristotle's cosmology?

Last edited by Gary (6/24/2018 7:51 pm)

**Posted by John West** 6/24/2018 9:10 pm

They don't even spell Aquinas's name right. . .

**Posted by John West** 6/24/2018 9:18 pm

Gary,

Would you mind copying any arguments you want people to reply to? That way they don't have to slog through twenty minutes of boring traditional and pop objections. It will also help keep the thread organized. (I confess: I didn't watch the whole video. I flicked through it, quickly, to see what you're asking about.)

**Posted by Jeremy Taylor** 6/24/2018 10:03 pm

The best way to show that Aristotle's physics and metaphysics (not the books, the subject matter) are isolable would be simply to note that the latter doesn't require the former - it is not a logical requirement to hold (the relevant) Aristotelian metaphysical positions that one holds Aristote's views on physics, nor is it the case that there can be no good reasons to accept the former if one did not accept the latter. At the very least, a detailed explanation is required to show why they are not isolable, which is unlikely to be given (not least because the sort of people who make these objections tend to have next to no familiarity with even reasonable secondary sources on the issues, let alone the primary sources).

**Posted by Miguel** 6/25/2018 12:39 am

John West wrote:
Gary,

Would you mind copying any arguments you want people to reply to? That way they don't have to slog through twenty minutes of boring traditional and pop objections. It will also help keep the thread organized. (I confess: I didn't watch the whole video. I flicked through it, quickly, to see what you're asking about.)

Second that, I'm not in the mood to watch the same tired objections and misunderstandings.

**Posted by Noble_monkey** 6/25/2018 12:51 am

Hey, I wrote a comprehensive and detailed refutation of this video here while defending the argument here.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1riQw5-9G4Ac8zYt38ei-ZnsC5in0bJeO6ceQf_RXhvg/edit?usp=sharing

If somebody can post it to youtube, that would be great and appreciated.

**Posted by Ouros** 6/25/2018 7:18 am

Noble_monkey wrote:
Hey, I wrote a comprehensive and detailed refutation of this video here while defending the argument here.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1riQw5-9G4Ac8zYt38ei-ZnsC5in0bJeO6ceQf_RXhvg/edit?usp=sharing

If somebody can post it to youtube, that would be great and appreciated.

Well, you certainly were motivated. That made me think that it would be great to have an argument map for every major, and even minor, theistic argument.
It seems to me that, with it, it would be clear that the so-called "definite objections" were, in fact, already answered.