|
The
Brownstone Journal >>
Issues >> Vol.
VIII Spring 1999
Theological and Philosophical Perspectives
on Aristotle’s Metaphysics and the Bible
Ellie Gebarowski-Shafer (CAS XX) is
a sophomore, majoring in English and minoring in philosophy.
Many great thinkers have tried to reconcile Aristotle's
theological views with perspectives in the Judeo-Christian Bible.
Whether or not the accomplishment of such a task is possible,
or even desirable, is certainly often for debate. A comparison
between these two major philosophical and theological texts
provides many interesting contrasts. The difference between
Aristotle's conceptions of god as an “unmoved mover” and the
Bible's idea of God as Creator is striking. However, there are
similarities between the Metaphysics and the Bible which may
not be as apparent.
According to Aristotle's philosophical account of the world,
the existence of a primary cause in the universe is absolutely
necessary. All things that can be seen, heard, touched, smelled,
or felt in the world, depend on something else; these things
in and of themselves cannot be substantive. For example, a cat’s
fur is not soft bccatlse ''soft'' is a substance or even because
a cat is a substance, but as the result of an indeterminate
number of factors: the owner feeds her cat expensive food; the
cat’s body receives nutrients which condition the fur. With
her fingers, the owner perceives that her cat's fur is ''soft''
to the touch. Cats have soft fur by nature if they have a healthy
diet. In each case, a thing receives its quality from some substance
which is other than its own. Thus, Aristotle concludes, “there
is an everlasting. unmoved substance that is separated from
perceptible things.” ( 1073:|.5) This ''unmoved mover'' is substance
in the truest senses for it exists in and of itself and remains
completely independent of all outside influence.
On this essential concept of Aristotelian “theology” that there
must be a primary cause which precedes everything else, the
Biblical theology agrees with reservation. The God of the Bible
is akin to Aristotle's “primary cause,” since nothing in the
world can exist without him. The obvious distinction is that
Yahweh, as the first substance, creates the world. “In the beginning
God created the heaven and the earth.” (Genesis l:l) The author
of the Gospel of John states that nothing can come to be without
God creating it first: ''All things were made by him: and without
him was not any thing made that was made.'' (John l:3) Aristotle’s
god does not create, but his ''it'' bears resemblance to the
Judeo-Christian God because in each account of the world, a
primary substance must come before all else.
According to Aristotle's logic, the “unmoved mover” could not
possibly be a creator: an act of creation seems to imply a need
or desire to create something less perfect than itself. In the
Metaphysics, a truly perfect being has no needs and can do nothing
to improve its state. Indeed, perfection would mean that there
is no higher state. The act of creating would then indicate
that the original substance needed something less than perfection,
even if simply to amuse itself. Additionally, Aristotle's perfect
god has a crucial limitation: it cannot think of anything less
than itself, since god's sole activity is contemplating the
highest possible thoughts. For Aristotle's theology, the world
has no creator at all. This seems to present a paradox, for
god is supposed to be the first mover, yet there is no way of
explaining where everything in the world came from. God is the
cause of matter, yet it did not create it..
For the God of Genesis, the idea of creation proposes no such
paradox, because this God can and does create beings less perfect
than himself. God gives no specific reason why he creates the
earth, but clearly he does not make it a perfect one. Even though
God says in Genesis l:26, “Let us make Man in our image, after
our likeness,” a few chapters later, his pet project Man turns
out to be flawed. Adam and Eve, God’s very first human beings,
disobey his explicit instructions and are forced lo leave the
Garden of Eden. Although King David says in his song of deliverance:
“As for God, his way is perfect...” (Samuel 22:3l). God’s creation
does not necessarily have to be.
Unlike the God of the Bible, the god described in the Metaphysics
does not interact with human beings. Aristotle proposes that
for god to think of anything less than perfection would be a
“trivial pursuit.” For Aristotle, it would be absurd to suggest
that an everlasting substance whose chief and only activity
is perfect thought would trouble itself with fickle human beings.
It does not bring itself down to the level of human understanding,
let alone try to understand individuals. Nor does god love,
for loving would mean once again, condescending to something
less perfect than itself.
Though Aristotle's god participates in no reciprocal relationship
with human beings, it does have some effect (intentional or
not) upon them. Aristotle describes God as an ''unmoved mover,''
meaning that things, including people. are moved towards “it,”
while “it” remains stationary. Furthermore, god's only activity
is divine understanding, which Aristotle explains is “an understanding
of understanding.” (1074b.35) If people move toward God, they
will move toward the essence of divine thought. And though a
person cannot become like god, his thought, in theory, can develop
to the point where it resembles divine understanding. Since
god is a completely perfect thought merely thinking of itself,
and all things move naturally toward ''it,'' the highest activity
of a human being must also be contemplation. People are not
perfect, and neither are their thoughts, but, ideally, the human
being moved closest to god will engage in divine thinking on
some level. The human mind cannot ever fully comprehend god
or divine thinking; nevertheless, the attempt to move in that
direction constitutes the point of human existence.
The God of the Bible defines the highest human activity differently
in terms of an engagement in reciprocal relationship with God.
The Bible does not specifically answer why God created human
beings nor what their primary function should be, but several
inferences may be made. Since God wants what is best for his
creation, he mandates that people follow certain rules. When
God gives Moses the Ten Commandments on Mount Sinai, he makes
it very clear to his chosen people, the Israelites, that they
must not do certain things, such as worship other gods, kill,
or steal (Exodus 20). In addition, he expects people, above
all else, to serve and to obey him: ''Ye shall walk after the
Lord your God, and fear him, and obey his voice, and ye shall
serve him, and cleave unto him.'' (Deuteronomy l3:4) Not only
is this God willing and able to concern himself with human activity,
he also demands that human beings reciprocate his feeling of
love for them, and repay him with honor and servitude.
Although the nature of the two divine beings’ interaction (or
non-interaction) with human beings seems to be radically different.
Aristotle’s explanation of a ''second mover'' in relation to
the first is very similar to the biblical God’s relationship
with Humankind. ''This second mover, then, must actually operate
in one way because of itself, writes the philosopher, and in
another way because of something else.'' (1072a.15) In comparison,
Man exists because ''something else'' (God) creates him, but
since he possesses the capacity to choose between Good and Evil
(Genesis 3), the things he chooses to do are, on a secondary
level, up to him. Human beings could not exist without God,
yet they do have some control over their lives in terms of making
right or wrong choices. Aristotle says that the first mover
is “the cause of what is always the same,” while the second
mover, ''is the cause of what is different at different times.''
(l072a.15) The Judeo-Christian God is the same ''yesterday,
and toay, and forever,'' (Hebrews l3:8), but Isaiah says of
Humanity, ''...we all do fade as a leaf.'' (Isaiah 64:6) People
change from day to day and generation to generation, as God,
the primary substance, is. They, as secondary substances (or
“second movers”) are different at different times intellectually
as well as physically and have a choice. Joshua compels his
fellow Israelites to make a choice about what they will do with
their lives. “And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord,
choose you this day whom ye will serve.” (Joshua 24:15) People
are responsible for their own lives in the realm of choice,
while God is the first mover in that he initiates their existence.
Christianity and Aristotelian theology and philosophy are often
viewed as incompatible and irreconcilable with each other. There
are some points, however, on which the two provide interesting
contrast. Each view attempts to give an account of the world:
for Aristotle, there must be a primary cause which exists independently,
and in the Judeo-Christian perspective. God is the primary cause
of everything in the worlds since he created it. Although the
biblical God has a mutual relationship with human beings while
Aristotle's go does not even know they exist, each serves as
a force guiding their lives deliberately or not and defines
the highest human activity.
Finally Aristotle's conception of a second mover that changes
and a first mover that is eternal and immutable resembles Humankind's
relationship with God, for God created them and always stays
the same but they change and are capable of making choices.
Both in the Metaphysics and in the Bible, the idea of ''God''
is pivotal for the rest of the text's philosophical and theological
views, for he or it exists prior to all life and thought on
earth. TBJ
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aristotle. The Metaphysics, from
Readings in Ancient Greek Philosophy: From Thales to Aristotle
(edd. Cohen. Curd. and Reeve: Hackett).
The Bible, King James Version.
|
|
