Nova interpretacija „trećeg puta“ Tome Akvinskog

Thomas Aquinas is known for his five arguments for God's existence, and of these "Five Ways", the third one is known as the argument from contingency, wherein the necessity of a necessary being is demonstrated. We submit this "Third Way" to argumentational analysis, which uncovers the existence of two distinct interpretations of this argument of reduction to absurdity. The interpretation based on finding a contradiction with experiential facts is shown as inadequate due to having its conclusions based on problematic observation selection effects. The interpretation based on finding a contradiction with a priori truths is shown as insufficient, as it does not posess the required a priori content. As a solution to these objections, we propose a new interpretation, one where the "Third Way" argument is regarded in conjunction with the "Second Way" argument, which then supplies the required a priori content needed for establishing a contradiction, all the while avoiding the pitfalls of observation selection effects. The proposed solution can be subjected to further evaluation and critique.