What is your answer?
The premiss in Aquinas' first way of proving God's existence that "Whatever is changed is changed by another":
{ 1 } - is false for ontological change.
{ 2 } - is not based on the principle of non-contradiction.
{ 3 } - is false for substantial change.
{ 4 } - is false for accidental change.
{ 5 } - is based on the principle of sufficient reason.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 5.
1 is wrong. Please try again.
The premiss in Aquinas' first way of proving God's existence that "Whatever is changed is changed by another":
{ 1 } - is false for ontological change.
{ 2 } - is not based on the principle of non-contradiction.
{ 3 } - is false for substantial change.
{ 4 } - is false for accidental change.
{ 5 } - is based on the principle of sufficient reason.
No, it is true that a being cannot create itself, for to do so it would have to exist before it existed, and that would violate the principle of non-contradiction.
<= back | menu | forward =>
2 is wrong. Please try again.
The premiss in Aquinas' first way of proving God's existence that "Whatever is changed is changed by another":
{ 1 } - is false for ontological change.
{ 2 } - is not based on the principle of non-contradiction.
{ 3 } - is false for substantial change.
{ 4 } - is false for accidental change.
{ 5 } - is based on the principle of sufficient reason.
Yes, it is.
<= back | menu | forward =>
3 is wrong. Please try again.
The premiss in Aquinas' first way of proving God's existence that "Whatever is changed is changed by another":
{ 1 } - is false for ontological change.
{ 2 } - is not based on the principle of non-contradiction.
{ 3 } - is false for substantial change.
{ 4 } - is false for accidental change.
{ 5 } - is based on the principle of sufficient reason.
No, it is true that a being cannot generate itself, for example, be its own parent, for to do so it would have to exist before it existed, and that would violate the principle of non-contradiction.
<= back | menu | forward =>
4 is correct!
The premiss in Aquinas' first way of proving God's existence that "Whatever is changed is changed by another":
{ 1 } - is false for ontological change.
{ 2 } - is not based on the principle of non-contradiction.
{ 3 } - is false for substantial change.
{ 4 } - is false for accidental change.
{ 5 } - is based on the principle of sufficient reason.
Some beings can change themselves accidentally; for example, Harry can change his position.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
5 is wrong. Please try again.
The premiss in Aquinas' first way of proving God's existence that "Whatever is changed is changed by another":
{ 1 } - is false for ontological change.
{ 2 } - is not based on the principle of non-contradiction.
{ 3 } - is false for substantial change.
{ 4 } - is false for accidental change.
{ 5 } - is based on the principle of sufficient reason.
No, it is based on the principle of non-contradiction: something cannot be in potentiality and actuality at the same time and in the same respect.
<= back | menu | forward =>
the end