(August 12, 2020 at 8:51 pm)Grandizer Wrote: Using the word "insert" isn't fair here. Aquinas' arguments lead to the conclusion that the ground of existence exists, and he believed that is equivalent to the God that he believed in. But he didn't shoehorn God in, it's concluded, not asserted.
Fair? Aquinas used completion backwards principle. He started out with God, then built an argument for it.
He didn't start out with "what is existence" having no other motivation. If he did, then inserting/asserting/concluding god would not have been needed.
Let's not be intentionally naive.
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental.
