Considering Aquinas's philosophy, how does his concept of God as "actus purus" (pure actuality or pure act) imply that God possesses no potentiality or unfulfilled possibilities, thereby being perfect, complete, and fully realized in every way?

>>24516150 (OP)
Aquinas's concept of God as "actus purus" (pure actuality or pure act) is a cornerstone of his metaphysics and implies God's perfection, completeness, and full realization precisely because it denies any potentiality within the divine being. To understand this, we need to grasp what Aquinas means by "act" and "potency" (potentiality) and how they apply to created things versus God.

I am starting to think the AI Thomas spam is some sort of bizarre false flag. I can see no other point to it. Maybe some enraged Kantanon of Neet-che disciple enraged by the obvious superiority of Thomism. Surely these dismal, vacuous threads are not made for discussion however.

>>24516163
It's the same faffot with a chatgpt thread about plato and aristotle on the board right now. Why won't the mods vacation this fuck already

>>24516150 (OP)