14. Aristotle's God

In this lesson we conclude our studies of Aristotle. We will cover the topics of Aristotle's understanding of God, an idea that became quite influential in subsequent philosophical speculation. We will also touch on Aristotle's theory of happiness, and the levels of happiness that he identifies.
In church history there has been some controversy over whether the arguments that Aristotle offered for the existence of God are worthwhile from a Christian perspective. In future studies, we will consider the 'five ways' of Thomas Aquinas in which he seeks to prove the existence of God relying largely on Aristotle's approach. Others, like Augustine and Anselm, take a different approach that relies more heavily on inward intuition than outward evidence.
For now we should simply appreciate the great achievements of Aristotle, including his perceptive insight into the nature of human happiness, and the apparent rational need for a great first cause to account for creation and our own existence.

[@monessarmohan1256]

Mr Gore, I thank you for these teachings, it transformed my life. It gives me energy to keep on doing what I am doing. The levels of happiness at age 70 I think I am rightly involved in. I have a non profit organization where I find myself more able to give than to receive. Thanks for uploading. You are a giver also who uploads to change lives.

[@Hassanospite]

thank you so much for uploading this video.

[@thephilosophermma8449]

For a thomist christian certain features of Aristotle's God maybe problematic because of their theological commitments but for a Muslim who's an Avicennian or follows any school of islamic philosophy , Aristotle's God is exactly what they worship because its identical since they give preference to reason above revelation or scripture.

[@ekhsima2167]

Mr. Gore, thank you for the kind of work that you have performed...what you have done some years ago, matters a lot for the students today in time of historical tragedy caused by COVID-19...🙏🙏❤️

[@Auto_Learning]

I disagree with Aristotle's idea that God must be unaware of us, since his knowledge would change if we changed. If God is truly omniscient he simply knows what will happen in the future, so being aware of us doesn't change him.

[@wanaagdoon]

Great lecture because it was humorous and closer to the truth as I conceive.

[@brucegore4373]

Thank you!

[@tjcalihan1953]

An alternative to process theology and Aristotle's God, might be that since God knows everything then everything has already existed throughout time. Also that any of his divine interventions into human affairs already existed and that people's destiny are never changing but already existing through mind of God. However, I do know this sounds Calvinism.

[@brucegore4373]

It also sounds like the Westminster Confession, chapter 3, paragraph 1, which puts you in pretty good company.

[@brentdoe3073]

Jesus is the Way the Truth and the Life

[@benardrichardson4551]

No

[@abohnad]

If human is the best being inside the world. Than happiness (1) win a human. (2) pleasure with the human. (3) giving ( producing ) a human. (4) serve the ultimate cause. However, the mean to do this should not be a material ( potential ) stuff such as money cars and land. But rather an immaterial stuff. Immaterial stuff also can be positive such as love, or negative such as hate. Therefore, to do 1234 you should do it with love. Love is attraction or gravity. Simply a force. So the earth loves the sun. There you should do it also. To serve the ultimate cause. Hate is repulse.

[@brianc4594]

trying to imagine the attributes of that which is beyond imagination

[@stevefergusson2438]

I so wanted a rice crispy treat by the time this was done!

[@mokhlisstsoulifaroukh1704]

Any idea about the spanish guitar at the beginning?

[@RunningRiotRaiden]

So in a way is the unmoved mover a personification of Aristotle's natural teliogology? Aware of itself but everything moves within and through it. In the same way that a river allows a boat movement but is not aware of the boat?

[@amank188]

but a river is never constant.

[@Hermes1548]

this God is Pure Thought which Thinks Itself. it has no matter, it is Pure Form (actuality) nature loves this Narcissistic God as the final cause: like a man moves towards his beloved's image. the separation of this God and nature is Absolute, which makes it as Prime Mover in need of some 43 added celestial engines. It is impossible, but quite bold.

[@exploratorize7703]

Thank You!

[@isabellaciullo3570]

Hi Bruce! I love this lecture. Would you be able to provide a resource for the theistic arguments for God? (teleological, First Cause, Necessary Being, and Motion)

[@johnlawrence2757]

Cf “Commentary On The First Six Chapters Of The Baghvad Gita” by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi “Take up your cross (yoga) and follow me” Action, not words Practice, not theory

[@theCordobaProject]

@@johnlawrence2757 this is hardly an answer to her question

[@mysteryneophyte]

or aware of all possiblities through out all of time time or from outside of time, seeing time itself as a construct, all at once. so knowing all, there is no change from the perspective of the absolute allowing for this god to remain changeless. right?

[@selwynjohnpalacol8793]

thankyou for this

[@bimboblacky]

FIRST cause UNcased, prime mover UNmoved.

[@rodicacretu1030]

I do not know about the memorial, but the history of philosophy should introduce the notion of "goreness".

[@mohammadmahmood8255]

Using "create" is wrong for Aristotelian God rarher "emanates" is the right word

[@ericzarahn9343]

Hello, Do you believe Aristotle's idea of happiness was intended to be descriptive, prescriptive, or ambiguous in that regard?

[@brucegore4373]

Aristotle is a scientist. I think most of his philosophy is descriptive, and non-judgmental. That certainly applies to his theory of happiness. Thanks for the thoughtful question.

[@ericzarahn9343]

Bruce Gore Thanks for the interesting answer. One follow-up question: I think that even ostensibly descriptive statements have a latent, sometimes intentional, prescriptive value. Do you think it is a reasonable hypothesis that some of Aristotle's descriptive philosophy was used in a prescriptive fashion by the early Church? Thanks again.

[@brucegore4373]

***** I would say that it is hypothetically possible, but that it would certainly be hard to demonstrate, given the rather dramatic differences between the message of the primitive church and the general philosophical outlook of Aristotle. The case you suggest can actually be made with more potency with regard to Platonism than Aristotelianism. In addition, Aristotle was not widely studied or appreciated in the Roman world until quite a bit later, especially after he was translated into Latin by Boethius.

[@gautampatnayak5624]

aristotle defines god as " the thought of......?

[@tjtommy5495]

29:21

[@NoahM100]

Great lecture! I wonder just how much influence these pagan philosophies have actually influenced Christian doctrine? Do you have a lecture where this is covered?

[@mikhacoffman4522]

n mka Christian doctrines were mostly influenced by Judaism, although they all share the idea of a Creator they vary between the connection the Creator has with His creation and small technicalities. And they all seem to come from the logic and reason which leads to the conclusion that there is a Creator, so no primar idea of a Creator is really a derivative from the next because its all a reasoning.

[@ExistenceUniversity]

The Abrahamic religions are 2 parts Vedic teaching and 1 part Platonism, will pagan holidays taken as a seasoning on top.

[@georgemillers6412]

Noısy

[@MrMarktrumble]

I think I will go into the hills, and be like god, and contemplate my navel. Actually, I will take the symbol of ouroboros and see how much I can know myself in real time and in full truth.

[@josipgregoric5380]

Then I heard another voice from heaven say: "'Come out of her, my people,' so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues; visit vaticancatholic.com

[@vojislavbelic896]

Catholicism is pagan syncretism.