Magical Wand
Active Member
When asked for the reasons why people believe in God, Intelligent Design proponents say a major one is the fact that the universe has order. This order, according to them, clearly, undeniably and inescapably shows that an intelligent designer was responsible for fashioning the natural world, because order cannot come from disorder/randomness/non-intelligence. Therefore, a designer deity exists.
Some objections to this argument were presented by C. M. Lorkowski in his book "A Survey of the Rational Rejection of Religious Belief" (pp. 81-83). I'll share just two objections, which seem (to me) sufficient to cast doubt on it:
“First, it helps to consider whether there is a viable alternative to an ordered universe, presumably a universe with no order, that is, a completely chaotic universe. But while we can talk casually about such a notion, many have argued that the concept of a completely chaotic universe is incoherent. This is because any coherent picture requires kinds to serve as sortals, at minimum, the most basic kinds such as “matter” and “space.” But to have any such kind requires that there are rules, definitions, natures, essences, etc., something that makes it a member of that kind rather than something else and thereby allows us to conceptually distinguish that kind. This is true of even the broadest kinds such as “matter.” A truly chaotic universe would therefore have to be a universe without any kinds, but such a state is inconceivable. A universe could certainly have a different order, perhaps even significantly less order, but it is far from clear that it could have no order at all. The very existence of the universe seems to entail some order, at least enough to have rules governing basic kinds, but once we have an ordered universe, it is not clear that there is anything left to explain...
A second consideration... is to wonder whether positing a deity actually adds anything to the explanation. Is a necessarily existing divine mind that requires no further explanation for its own ordered existence a better explanation than simply saying that the order of the universe (in the form of the laws) requires no further explanation? [In other words], when considering order in the form of the most basic laws of nature,... [is there a] reason to think that an undesigned designer provides any richer, more intellectually gratifying explanation than the naturalist account[?]"
If you also have some objection to the Order Argument, you're more than welcome to share with us.
Some objections to this argument were presented by C. M. Lorkowski in his book "A Survey of the Rational Rejection of Religious Belief" (pp. 81-83). I'll share just two objections, which seem (to me) sufficient to cast doubt on it:
“First, it helps to consider whether there is a viable alternative to an ordered universe, presumably a universe with no order, that is, a completely chaotic universe. But while we can talk casually about such a notion, many have argued that the concept of a completely chaotic universe is incoherent. This is because any coherent picture requires kinds to serve as sortals, at minimum, the most basic kinds such as “matter” and “space.” But to have any such kind requires that there are rules, definitions, natures, essences, etc., something that makes it a member of that kind rather than something else and thereby allows us to conceptually distinguish that kind. This is true of even the broadest kinds such as “matter.” A truly chaotic universe would therefore have to be a universe without any kinds, but such a state is inconceivable. A universe could certainly have a different order, perhaps even significantly less order, but it is far from clear that it could have no order at all. The very existence of the universe seems to entail some order, at least enough to have rules governing basic kinds, but once we have an ordered universe, it is not clear that there is anything left to explain...
A second consideration... is to wonder whether positing a deity actually adds anything to the explanation. Is a necessarily existing divine mind that requires no further explanation for its own ordered existence a better explanation than simply saying that the order of the universe (in the form of the laws) requires no further explanation? [In other words], when considering order in the form of the most basic laws of nature,... [is there a] reason to think that an undesigned designer provides any richer, more intellectually gratifying explanation than the naturalist account[?]"
If you also have some objection to the Order Argument, you're more than welcome to share with us.
Last edited: