I follow his argument that nothing on earth can be perfect because it all has an end. Since everything has an end, it cannot be perfect. Humans want to be happy and the things that make them happy here in this life can not be brought into another life. Also, humans want everything to be perfect so the desire for perfection is happiness. With this, it is impossible for true happiness to exist in this life. Also, people have the knowledge to know what they want to know. People would question how everything started and this would lead to there being a God who was perfect and created everything. On the other hand, Aquinas believes that there are forms of happiness that are in this life, but they are not perfect. That brings him to his point that seeing God is the form of true happiness. I do not believe his argument fully because it is obvious that he has had an upbringing with God of high importance. Since he has this, it would be understood that God is perfect and seeing God would be the best form of happiness. If you look at this from another point of view, say of someone who does not believe in any God, they would not have any form of true happiness according to Aquinas if there was not a God. His argument is dependent upon if there is a God. I think that you could come very close to true happiness in this life. There are many people and beliefs that are able to get you there. If something makes you happy and it is good, keep doing it. A relationship is a good example because the bond of the two people in this life can end here, but continue on if there is something after life. This helps to show that happiness could be carried over from this life to the
I follow his argument that nothing on earth can be perfect because it all has an end. Since everything has an end, it cannot be perfect. Humans want to be happy and the things that make them happy here in this life can not be brought into another life. Also, humans want everything to be perfect so the desire for perfection is happiness. With this, it is impossible for true happiness to exist in this life. Also, people have the knowledge to know what they want to know. People would question how everything started and this would lead to there being a God who was perfect and created everything. On the other hand, Aquinas believes that there are forms of happiness that are in this life, but they are not perfect. That brings him to his point that seeing God is the form of true happiness. I do not believe his argument fully because it is obvious that he has had an upbringing with God of high importance. Since he has this, it would be understood that God is perfect and seeing God would be the best form of happiness. If you look at this from another point of view, say of someone who does not believe in any God, they would not have any form of true happiness according to Aquinas if there was not a God. His argument is dependent upon if there is a God. I think that you could come very close to true happiness in this life. There are many people and beliefs that are able to get you there. If something makes you happy and it is good, keep doing it. A relationship is a good example because the bond of the two people in this life can end here, but continue on if there is something after life. This helps to show that happiness could be carried over from this life to the