Thomas Aquinas's Proof of the Soul

Рет қаралды 9,915

Күн бұрын

Today we'll explore how Aquinas proved that we have a soul and how his view works better than Rene Descartes's.
___________________________________________________________________________
SOURCES
Thomas Aquinas - Summa Theologica: www.newadvent....
Question 75
www.newadvent....
___________________________________________________________________________
MY SOCIALS
Discord Server: / discord
TikTok: / sanctus.dominus
___________________________________________________________________________

Пікірлер: 86

@SanctusTheology 11 ай бұрын

Comment Feedback!

@focus9375 11 ай бұрын

good stuff brother

@Jhostly 11 ай бұрын

@@focus9375 please change your pfp, it's imprudent to put a saint in a meme.

@Gladdig 11 ай бұрын

I've heard different explanations of this but never understood it. Your video just made it click for me. Great video!

@crookbrother 4 ай бұрын

I’m just a noob noob noob when it comes to theology and I’m hopping into this while memorizing Psalms, learning Russian, learning polemics and apologetics, and reading scripture. God bless my God-given mind as I feel so receptive of this. Not to brag but to share my joy as with the Holy Spirit the mind has no quantifiable limit, and to ask everyone to push themselves mentally and pray for deeper understanding and strength to persist.

@humbirdms2784 15 күн бұрын

God bless you for being motivated to grow in knowledge and wisdom that will deepen you're love for God. May Christ have mercy on us all. Forgive us our sins and lead us to everlasting life.

@crookbrother 15 күн бұрын

@ I’ve been inspired today to amp up my learning big time so it’s interesting I get a reply right now

@prestonyannotti7661 11 ай бұрын

Great video man! Im writing a essay on this so this video is a blessing

@SanctusTheology 11 ай бұрын

I’m glad i could help !

@jfcrtr 11 ай бұрын

Just found your channel. Thank you for the wisdom! God Bless

@franciseenc 11 ай бұрын

Great video! Short and sweet. I would enjoy a video addressing ‘The Logical Problem of The Trinity’ (specially the one shown in the KZbin channel Jake the Muslim Metaphysician). God bless!

@SanctusTheology 11 ай бұрын

Definitely will have to do that one! Thanks for watching 🙏

@SchizoidCajetanian 10 ай бұрын

The LPT has been debunked by Astro.

@franciseenc 10 ай бұрын

@@SchizoidCajetanian Who’s Astro?

@SchizoidCajetanian 10 ай бұрын

@@franciseenc kzbin.info/www/bejne/mX_ceWedeZ2rsLMsi=WI3rZmTCXdx5hzY7

@hikedayley9309 7 ай бұрын

@@franciseenc He was the Jetson's Dog

@Digganob590 11 ай бұрын

Makes a lot of sense. The only two counter-arguments it seems are that our perfect conception of form in the mind are an illusion, an imperfect or incomplete simulation, and not actually the form of the thought-of thing, or that form itself does not exist, which brings into question why matter is apparently able to take forms, even if as small as atoms.

@evan7391 5 ай бұрын

It also calls into question what the identity between this imperfect particular conception in our brain and the external particular that is represents. If it is another particular conception, then what is the identity between that, the first conception, and the external particular it represents. This results in an infinite regress, because one local particular cannot account for the shared identity of the group of particulars. Therefore, there has to be a non-local absolute form that transcends the particulars.

@Maskedlapis64 24 күн бұрын

I very much appreciate your channel 🙏

@FatherBrown34 7 күн бұрын

Feser’s Aquinas goes hard. You should reference it when using it, people need to read it :)

@By_Noble_Means 10 ай бұрын

I'm currently reading Aquinas for Beginners by Edward Faser, your videos are a large help.

@SanctusTheology 10 ай бұрын

Great book, i recently read that, and thanks for the feedback!

@blade_runna6057 Ай бұрын

Interesting point at the end about Aquinas' non-distinction of mind and body

@VitaWalkingTours 11 ай бұрын

Nice. Keep going!

@SanctusTheology 11 ай бұрын

Thank you!

@thomism1016 7 ай бұрын

Awesome!💐🙏🏾❤️ Please keep up the good work🎊!! Bravo 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾

@gloopdevyoinky9271 11 ай бұрын

Hidden gem of an account

@evan7391 5 ай бұрын

Excellent video! I think this is also a great argument against nominalism. Even if we have a fictional universal, what is the identity between that universal and the external particular? It cannot be another fictional universal, otherwise we would need to explain the identity between that, the first universal, and the external particular. We eventually have to admit a one over many absolute form above these particulars, that is itself not a particular.

@dexter8549 11 ай бұрын

Great video! If the soul is the person but the mind is not completely the soul does that mean the soul knows something that the mind doesn't? Also, what microphone and what do you use to record your voice?

@echoes5476 7 ай бұрын

No, it means the souls has properties that the mind doesn't

@halfapersonalityaquarterof9871 11 ай бұрын

Awesome video, I disagree with it but the argument is really creative and thought out

@BerishaFatian 11 ай бұрын

So if I understood this right, the fact that when I think of a dog and that dog doesn't become real, shows that my mind is immaterial because I'm thinking of an immaterial dog?

@SanctusTheology 11 ай бұрын

It demonstrates that your mind is immaterial as if your brain were purely matter, and if you think of a form, that form and matter would become a material thing being thought of.

@lacobymills4930 10 ай бұрын

Similar to the idea of evolution. Something of a particular species can only produce entitles that are of the same species. If we predicate a fully natural universe, then mental processes should produce only material things, but we observe that concepts do not materialize unless actualized by other material things. The concept of a house is different from an actual house. Hylomorphism is possessing a form (essence) without becoming that thing. The form isn't material in the Hebrew Bible, God was said to make humans in his zelem ( image). It's not an actual image. Instead, maimonides interpret zelem to be essence. Saint john of damascus says that we are a union of body and soul. We are not just our souls, and we aren't just our bodies.

@mathiasrausch7098 10 ай бұрын

But wouldnt that mean that a computer who has the image of the dog would become a dog? Because computers clearly dont have a soul.....@@SanctusTheology

@SanctusTheology 10 ай бұрын

@@mathiasrausch7098 It’s different in that it’s a code of 1s and 0s and not an actual form, the computer has no ability also to think abstractly in this case as well, it’s programmed.

@gabrielvalentoniguelfi8945 7 ай бұрын

Yup, computers don't actually "think" of anything. Even AIs who SIMULATE to understand what a dog is, do nor really understand what is a dog, its just organized data. They don't actually "comprehend" anything.

@michaelanderson4849 8 ай бұрын

The example with the red rubber ball is a bit problematic. The matter is shaped into a ball so how can the shape be separated from the matter? The ball is not red. The color is created in our brain. And the bounciness is an effect of certain ways the matter is combined.

@JohnTheRevelator11 19 күн бұрын

The color is created by frequency which is conceived in the brain

@Jimmy-iy9pl 18 күн бұрын

Because the matter that the ball was made out of had the potential to be made into some other form.

@michaelanderson4849 14 күн бұрын

@Jimmy-iy9pl One has to be careful with the language used. The shape of the atoms are not changed. But large groups of atoms can be assembled into shapes like a ball or a triangle. Like a pile of sand. The individual grains of sand are the same. It's the conglomerate of grains that is shaped into various forms. So, what potential are we talking about?

@michaelanderson4849 3 күн бұрын

@JohnTheRevelator11 Frequency is not a "thing" that can create anything. Color is entirely created in the brain and is actually a bit messy. Yellow can both be generated by a narrow range of photons around 580nm. But can also be generated by a combination of "red" and "green" photons without any "yellow" photons whatsoever.

@Renegen1 3 ай бұрын

plants also react to sense data and have mobility.

@Jesus_Christ_is_My_Lord. Ай бұрын

So, when one experiences death (separation of soul from the body), would the body or the soul be the actual person? Since the human body is the actual person, as stated in the last part of the video.

@dynamic9016 4 ай бұрын

Insightful.

@TheMightyPALADIN 7 ай бұрын

All that this really means is that thoughts and ideas are not material. Something no one was ever confused about. Aquinas and Plato before him were really good at belaboring the obvious. Unfortunately, it has no relevance whatsoever to the question of whether or not we have a soul, because a soul is much more than thoughts and ideas, in fact much more than our lives. Our soul is supposed to be an immaterial part of us that continues to live after the death of our bodies. That meaning of the soul is the only reason why the subject of a soul concerns anyone, and this meaning is not addressed at all in anything he said. I'm sorry. I do believe people have souls, but I don't believe animals or plants have souls. I can't prove it, but I also can't doubt it.

@jfk1214 7 ай бұрын

Lovely music what is it

@39knights 11 ай бұрын

In some ways it would appear the soul can exist seperated from the body ut is incomplete. After earthly death the soul appears before God for the Immediate Judgement, after which it will then reside in heaven, hell , or purgatory awaiting the resurrection of its body at the end of time. Just wondering how Aquinas addresses the soul during this period.

@SanctusTheology 11 ай бұрын

He would say it’s possible, but it’s incomplete . Just like when you lose an arm or a leg, your body is incomplete in a sense.

@knowledgedesk1653 6 ай бұрын

Does Aquinas know about emergent properties?

@apostolicfollower 11 ай бұрын

love it!

@tonybaloney8401 17 күн бұрын

Where's the proof of the soul?

@roccocarlino067 7 ай бұрын

The last place you would source information on the soul is from a Christian. Ancient Indian scriptures are the authority on the soul, that's where early Greek philosophers and virtually anyone else sourced their knowledge from. Even today, Indian women place a bindi on their forehead representing a soul, their culture is governed by understanding the soul. The Mind, Intellect and Subconscious is a huge topic, best left to the experts.

@abelovedchildofgod7383 6 ай бұрын

That is a genetic fallacy. Where the idea comes from have nothing to do with it being true or false

@CaliRaveBoi 11 ай бұрын

A baby doesn't know what a triangle is... therefore a baby does not have a soul...

@SanctusTheology 11 ай бұрын

They still have a rational soul just like someone who is deficient in the mind, the matter of their body is just limited at that moment.

@CaliRaveBoi 10 ай бұрын

@@SanctusTheology do you differentiate between rationality and instinct, if so what is your major difference?

@SanctusTheology 10 ай бұрын

@@CaliRaveBoi Rationality is the ability to reason the abstract and know other substances or essences, I would look at instincts as more of a natural reaction which doesn’t always require rationality.

@CaliRaveBoi 10 ай бұрын

@@SanctusTheology what do you mean by abstract? intangible ideas, like thoughts Humans can be reactive vs responding. Crows dropping pebbles into a container to raise the water level is rationality? Is that what you mean by rationality = forethought?

@davonbenson4361 7 ай бұрын

@@CaliRaveBoi. You can’t rely on material senses to abstract Universals, which means that our soul is of a higher quality. The baby’s soul is what allows it to grow into a rational animal. If you payed attention to the video, he clearly stated that the soul is what gives matter it’s form and characteristics.