Aristotle's God is in many ways a matter which is widely open to conjecture. There are a number of ways you can actually look at it. what is Aristotle's God?
To understand this, you have to understand Aristotle's logical track. If you do not follow the track, you just come up with a very unsupported axiomatic statement that no one would be able to understand in any event. I could just say "Aristotle's God is the unmoved mover," but then where does that leave you. To me, I would be more confused. The sources I use in this interpretation are; Aristotle's Metaphysics
and scholarly work of two dominant views, Paul Natorp and Werner Jaeger.
" Book Alpha of the Metaphysics underlines the primacy of "first philosophy" as a "sought-for science." This is important to note because in book Gamma, the sought-for science is going to be the examination of what Aristotle calls "being qua being" (which essentially means "substance as substance in itself"). So keep in mind that God and substantial onotology are very closely linked.
. Paronomy is essentially to be called something in relation to some one
thing. So take for example an elaboration of Paronomy in Book Gamma; "Health is both health in itself and the principle cause of being healthy. It is the first healthy thing. (1003a33)" According to Paul Natorp, this is meant to link Aristotle's ousianous
(extends to substance?) is the eidos
(form of forms).
So you have A, God is relative to substance, B, Aristotle's admits a theological point, and C, Paronomy for Aristotle begins to show a sort of cause, effect, and a precursor to that causes' cause beginning to take shape.
So now when you get to Book Lambda, you get to Aristotle's conception of God
. The introduction Book Lamda (widely regarded as Aristotle's address to Theology (Jaeger) in MetaphysicsAs far as what it is to be an "unmoved moverSo in short, Aristotle's God is the unmoved mover.
There is a lot more to it actually, but this is a rough outline of what the essential nature of God is for Aristotle. Now as far as what makes this God worth having, could you imagine a universe in non-motion without causation or necessity?