Q&A: The Teleological Argument and the Book "God Plays Dice"
The Teleological Argument and the Book "God Plays Dice"
Question
1) If I understood the Rabbi correctly in his book God Plays Dice, what is the difference between the Rabbi’s claim about the improbability of evolution and the proofs for its existence, and the watchmaker argument, the teleological argument?
2) I also heard that modern physics is facing a certain upheaval (I don’t know if that’s true; I assume the Rabbi is aware of it if it is indeed so), that relativity theory at very large or very small scales, and likewise at very high or very low temperatures and other extreme parameters, no longer works, and the physics taught in high school will no longer be relevant. If so, then as science develops we will need to find new proofs for the existence of God. Post-Aristotelian physics already collapsed after hundreds of years—doesn’t that make things discouraging?
Answer
1) What connection is there between the arguments? You can use teleology as an expression of improbability. That is, a world directed toward its purpose is special and therefore requires a creator. I explained that my argument is a continuation of Paley. This is clarified more fully in an article on my site.
https://mikyab.net/%d7%9b%d7%aa%d7%91%d7%99%d7%9d/%d7%9e%d7%90%d7%9e%d7%a8%d7%99%d7%9d/%d7%9e%d7%91%d7%98-%d7%a9%d7%99%d7%98%d7%aa%d7%99-%d7%a2%d7%9c-%d7%99%d7%97%d7%a1%d7%99-%d7%90%d7%91%d7%95%d7%9c%d7%95%d7%a6%d7%99%d7%94-%d7%95%d7%90%d7%9e%d7%95%d7%a0%d7%94/
2) I haven’t heard about that. But what does that have to do with what I wrote? Are proofs for the existence of God really based on some particular scientific knowledge that is correct today and might not be correct in the future? My entire book is devoted to explaining that they are not. See again the article I linked above.