Running head: PHILOSOPHY 101
1
An infinity of humans
Peter Piker
University Of Washington
PHILOSOPHY 101
2
An infinity of humans
According to Aristotle, the infinite is defined as anything that has no end. The series of
numbers, for example, is endless because there is always another greater number that comes after
each number in the sequence. In a similar vein, the world has existed for an endless amount of
time since there is a day before every day in the universe. According to Aristotle, however, this is
a "potential" infinity since objects do not cohabit at the same time these days; a "actual" infinity,
on the other hand, is impossible because an infinite number of things all exist at the same time is
impossible.Philoponus and his followers from the 13th century, on the other hand, believe that
this argument has flaws that Aristotle was unaware of at the time. They point out that he thinks
that all of the many forms of living organisms in the cosmos have existed from the beginning of
time. Assuming this is correct, they argue, it would entail that there were an unlimited number of
human beings at the time Socrates was born, since if humans have always been, they must have
existed at the time of Socrates' birth. Although many more people have been born since Socrates'
time, the total number of humans born up to and including the present must be larger than
infinite. However, there is no number that can be bigger than infinity.As an added bonus, these
authors point out that Christian theologians believe that human souls are immortal. It follows
from this that there must be an endless number of human souls in existence right now, assuming
that an infinite number of individuals have previously been. As a result, there is a real infinite of
souls, rather than a potential infinity, and Aristotle has said that actual infinity is
impossible.Philoponus and his disciples were certain that they had proven that the cosmos could
not have existed at all times by presenting these two arguments, which were based on Aristotle's
own ideas as a starting point. As a result, Aristotle was incorrect; the cosmos is not everlasting,
which is entirely consistent with the Christian belief that God created the world.This line of
PHILOSOPHY 101
3
argument does not hold much water with Aquinas. He argues that although the cosmos may have
lasted for eons, species such as humans and other animals may have had a beginning, and that by
doing so, the challenges presented by Philoponus and his followers may be overcome. Because
the Christian faith teaches that the cosmos is finite and not eternal, Aquinas does not accept
Aristotle's argument that the universe is eternal, but he does not consider Aristotle's stance to be
irrational. Aquinas, like Philoponus and his followers, is concerned with demonstrating that the
cosmos had a beginning—but he is equally concerned with demonstrating that Aristotle's
argument is without fault. He believes that his Christian contemporaries have conflated two
distinct points: the first is that God created the cosmos, and the second is that the universe had a
beginning, both of which are incorrect. With this in mind, Aquinas set out to demonstrate that
Aristotle's position—that the cosmos has always existed—could in fact be correct, even if it is
also true that God created the universe.