There must be a First: Why Thomas Aquinas Rejects Infinite, Essentially Ordered, Causal Series

Abstract

Several of Thomas Aquinas's proofs for the existence of God rely on the claim that causal series cannot proceed in infinitum. I argue that Aquinas has good reason to hold this claim given his conception of causation. Because he holds that effects are ontologically dependent on their causes he holds that the relevant causal series are wholly derivative: the later members of such series serve as causes only insofar as they have been caused by and are effects of earlier members. Because the intermediate causes in such series possess causal powers only by deriving them from all the preceding causes, they need a first and non-derivative cause to serve as the source of their causal powers.

‘There Is Nothing but Blind, Pitiless Indifference in the Universe:’ Evolution and Divine Purpose

“…54 However, this, Tabaczek clarifies, means that the theologian is not obliged to argue that an ant (as an example of a creature that is clearly evolutionarily successful) is on the same metaphysical footing as Neanderthals (as an example of an evolutionary unsuccessful creature). 55 In other words, Tabaczek argues, just because a creature is evolutionarily well-adapted does not mean that it is metaphysically superior. While biologists might bicker over what (if anything) is 'meant by high and low forms,' theologians are adamant.…”

“…1 No. 1 (2014), p.60 55 Biologists and evolutionary historians may want to question whether Neanderthal's should rightly be considered 'unsuccessful.' I take it that their extinction is evidence that, as successful as they may have been, they are no longer.…”

Recent Work on Traditional Arguments for Theism I

“…A classic example would be falling dominos. Anyway, concerning the first three Ways, Aquinas is dubious only of an infinite series ordered per se, arguing that an initiator is required (for recent work on this distinction and its relevance to the Ways, see Kerr, 2012; Cahoe, 2013; Schmid, 2021b).…”

The Body in Jesus’ Tomb as a Hylemorphic Puzzle: a Response to Jaeger and Sienkiewicz and an Application for Christological Anthropology

“…The resulting 'act' in the form/matter/substance causal series is the substance. To wit, Caleb Cohoe (2013) describes such causal series this way: An essentially ordered causal series is asymmetric, irreflexive, and wholly derivative. The subsequent members in such a series are not only caused by and ontologically dependent on the preceding members, as in a transitive series, they also serve as causes only insofar as they have been caused by and are effects of all the preceding members (839-840).…”