Both rationalists put much significance on the confidence one must have in God through other worldly experience, yet treat tactile data altogether different. Aquinas, in spite of Augustine, was a remarkable empiricist. As he drew on Aristotle, who was additionally an empiricist, Aquinas trusted the faculties are that through which we discover reality. Aquinas, alongside Aristotle, trusted that deliberation is a procedure that happens in the human personality. A man, subsequent to seeing numerous material articles, for example, a wicker bin ball, will have the capacity to extract the general type of the item, along these lines having the capacity to build the conceptual thought of a b-ball in their brain, which would be a procedure done by the "dynamic mind". Aquinas developed Aristotle's thoughts of the astuteness and how we comprehend data. Aquinas contended that the brains comprehend "ghosts", or inside duplicates of what we see, by abstracting. The "aloof keenness" is the part of the insightfulness that knows material protests, what Aquinas accepted is the means by which we know all items. To comprehend ghosts, we require the detached brains to comprehend what we are seeing. The dynamic judgment is the part of the acumen ready to digest from learning of the inactive.

Both Aquinas and Augustine concur upon the way that God is the object of extreme learning. The logicians would see eye to eye on the way that one can know God through reason, while nobody can know or comprehend God completely in light of the fact that man is however God's creation. While both of these scholars and rationalists kept up goals extraordinarily affected by Christianity, they both accommodated their convictions in altogether different ways. Augustine was all that much impacted by Plato, though Aquinas was guided seriously by Aristotle. The old scholars had amazing influence on both Augustine and Aquinas, and it appeared in their theories of confidence and reason, the spirit, and learning incredibly. One idea the two were in concession to, in spite of the numerous distinctions they had, is that God was the object of human each of the three of these themes. Saint Thomas Aquinas held a fairy different stand on reason and faith .He did not clearly differentiate the two as Augustine did, however he did believe that all truth and creation is originated from God. He didn’t believe that reason and faith went contrary to each other, although there exist truths that reason won’t achieve that faith can .He called this idea as “two fold truth”, that is something can be true of faith, not true in philosophy ,but not in the other way round. This supports the idea that while reason leads one to a greater understanding of the earth, it won’t lead one to achievement of the greater truths that faith would. He believed that both faith and reason, are essential and not contrary to each other, in fact ,is fundamental in that act of faith. He believes that faith is an intellectual act, and it’s object is nothing but truth only. Hence any truth must lead to faith. He claimed that since people won’t understand God as an object, the intellect can comprehend his existence indirectly, and this comprehension comes through reason.

Aquinas to some extent agrees with Augustine on the issue of contradiction between scripture and reason .Aquinas held that while there is a possibility of no evidence of something from sensational experience. Which he held to be the way we perceive the world, we have to trust in ‘’articles of faith” which he defines as a divine testimony or scripture. For instance, though there is no sensational evidence for the earth not being everlasting, he believed that the “article of faith” that we have to accept this as true. Now on matters of the soul, Augustine made changes to his perspective on the soul, during the course of his writings. He took on a very platonic definition in his early writings that human soul is a component that is capable of reason and to have authority over the human body .it is separate from the body and the body rarely uses it. However this perspective changed later in his writings, when put more importance on the union of the body and soul. He not only believed that human being is certainly a rational soul that have authority over the human body ,he also said that “ soul which has a body does not make two persons but only one human being ”(Johannes evangelium tractatus).However he still remains true to his platonic ideal by placing the soul in the Plato’s real understanding of forms,here abstract ideas reside .He believed the soul to be the ‘’rider’’ of the of the body. This made a clear difference between material and non-material forms; body and soul Augustine committed himself to the view that Christian teaching holds that there is life after death, since he took scripture to be the direct word of God. He believed “after the fall of man this life after death was not available to us. In redeeming us from our original sin by his death and resurrection from death, Jesus redeemed us from original sin, hence restored our relationship with God, and made it possible for us once again to live eternally with God in the life hereafter.” (Wall) he believed that the soul went on to live in heaven and entrance to it was “available to all who love God and their”.(wall)
He raised two arguments, which originates from platonic reasoning as to why the soul is immortal.
The first argument pertains to science. He argues that there exists science; it exists with the living .also as long science is eternal, that in which it lives must be eternal too. Additionally he argues that the only living souls beings who possess a rational soul and who won’t reason without science. His second argument for soul immortality is “mind is life, and thus it cannot lack itself.” He explains this deeper by asserting we don’t think of the physical matter as being dead when a living things dies, but as it being left by life. He believed the mind as something won’t lack itself and as a source of life to the body; soul can’t lack itself hence can’t die. (De Immortalitate Animae)

Thomas Aquinas had same perspective in that there is indeed life after death, and that the soul is separable from the body, but he supported these claims in a different way. This can be seen through Aquinas’ view of the nature of the soul. He took a very Aristotelian perspective on this topic by sticking with his idea of “causes”. He believed that there existed “four causes”, material, formal, efficient, and final. He agreed with Aristotle in believing that the soul was the “formal” cause of the human body. This made his view on the soul compatible with Aristotle’s because it set up his argument to suggest that the soul could be separated by abstraction from the body, which I will explain more of it. One of his weaker arguments for life after death is that of desire. This argument states that no desire goes in vain under God. By this statement, he suggests that the desire to live after death of the body would not go in vain either. A stronger argument for the possibility of the immortal soul is concept formation. He asserted that since human beings are can think of abstract ideas apart from material forms, for example, to think of a square without seeing one that this is evidence also of the soul being able to exist without attachment to material forms. Maybe the most grounded contention Aquinas made for the everlasting life of the spirit is the support of division of the body and soul. As expressed some time recently, Aquinas was extremely affected by Aristotle, and that is the same when he represents the spirit. To comprehend Aquinas' perspectives on the spirit we should first illuminate in the middle of "subsistent" and "substance". A subsistent for Aquinas is something that can exist all alone, not in another. A substance is something that "is subsistent and complete in nature – a nature being an intrinsic principle of movement and change in the subject." (SEP) Thus, both the human body and soul are both fit for existing all alone, however they are just substances when joined together in their complete nature. By this Aquinas additionally is tolerating that the spirit is the type of the body, which is yet another Aristotelian view he received with a specific end goal to contend for the godlikeness of the spirit. Aquinas contends that on the grounds that the spirit is a profound substance, it doesn't rely on upon make a difference and can exist independently from the body. Aquinas trusts that the human presence in its ideal structure is in the double way of soul and body, which relates specifically to his faith in restoration in the hereafter. Aquinas seems to have three contentions for the everlasting life of the spirit. Augustine drew quite a bit of his hypothesis of information from Plato, particularly in his yearning for certain learning instead of changing or impermanent learning. As opposed to Aquinas, Augustine was not an empiricist. Augustine trusted "that actually found from inside, through a procedure of enlightenment, and not by watching the universe of nature. It had been Plato's view that such information emerged from a procedure of recalling the Forms from a past presence, which was made conceivable by the Good lighting up the psyche to recollect. Augustine expands upon these Platonic thoughts however changes them drastically" (Wall). Augustine concurred with Plato as in genuine information originated from inside, yet Plato trusted it originated from "recall", though Augustine trusted it originated from "enlightenment".

Augustine trusted that these convictions couldn't be taught, pretty much as Plato thought, yet Augustine thought these thoughts originated from light through Christ, the awesome instructor. This is the reason Augustine trusted motivation to be divine, "since comprehension is made conceivable by the "light of Christ", and along these lines is a blessing from God" (Wall). Augustine trusted that in any case a thought is shaped in the judicious human soul, synonymous with psyche as a rule, it is on the grounds that Christ "lit up" us and put that thought there. Accordingly, soundness is divine.

To liken Augustine back to Plato, both logicians trusted that it was difficult to accomplish information through the distinguishable world. This thought comes from Platonic hypothesis of learning in that the material world (the principal layer of Plato's Divided Line) is continually changing and untrustworthy as a wellspring of data. Pretty much as Plato trusted it was an incomprehensible wellspring of data about his Good, which we can compare to Augustine's God, there is no chance to get for Augustine to find out about God through a moving world when he longings to think about the unceasing God. Augustine did not believe that we frame conceptual ideas from seeing products of specific protests, or learning of an idea, additionally through enlightenment, equitable to Plato's conviction that one must "recollect" dynamic ideas, or Forms.

Conclusion One of the crucial purposes of Augustine is that individuals are fallen because of sin. We can say that he has an extremely solid perspective of unique sin. This incorporates the reasoning capacities of individuals. In this way, as indicated by Augustine, nobody can reason their approach to God. We can say that Augustine has a somewhat disheartening perspective of mankind. In light of this, the connection in the middle of confidence and reason is: "confidence looking for reason." Or we can say, Augustine trusts keeping in mind the end goal to get it. With regards to Aquinas, he, as well, trusted that humankind was fallen; however he had a much higher perspective of the psyche. At the end of the day, he trusted that through watchful thinking and scholarly exertion, a man could achieve the determination of a Christian God. Indeed, one reason for his artful culmination, Summa Theologica, was to demonstrate the presence of God. From this point of view, we can say that reason can prompt confidence, the polar opposite of Augustine. All in all they all played a crucial role in attempting to reconcile ancient philosophy with Christianity despite taking different routes in achieving this goal.

references
Augustine. “Johannis Evangelium Tractatus.” S. Aurelii Augustini … Contra Epistolam Parmeniani Liber II.- S. Aurelii Augustini … Epistola Ad Bonifacium.- S. Aurelii Augustini … In Divi Johannis Evangelium Tractatus XXVI.- S. Aurelii Augustini … Epistola Prior Ad Januarium.- S. Aurelius Augustinus Hilario, Respondens Ad Illius Quæstiones. N.p.: n.p., 1843. N. Min. 18. 19.15 Print.
Augustine, and George G. Leckie. On the Immortality of the Soul (De Immortalitate Animae). New York: D. Appleton-Century, 1938. Print.
McInerny, Ralph and O’Callaghan, John, “Saint Thomas Aquinas”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2010/entries/aquinas/>.