Q&A: The Watchmaker Argument
The Watchmaker Argument
Question
Hello Rabbi,
In the familiar watchmaker argument, there is an analogy: if there is a creation, then it must have a creator, and therefore the world has a Creator. At first glance this sounds very logical and simple—the problem is solved.
The issue is that if you look more closely, one thing does not have just one creator. It is a collection of information that accumulated layer upon layer, plus trial and error, and all kinds of people who specialize in different fields. For example, a house has an architect, but it also has a structural engineer, an electrical engineer, plumbing consultants, air-conditioning consultants, contractors, builders, tilers, plasterers, and more and more… The more complex something is, the more creators we would need. So why should we assume, based on that same principle, that the world—which is so complex—has one creator?
Answer
There is no necessity. Someone may invoke Ockham's razor, but choose according to your own understanding.
Discussion on Answer
First of all, there is Ockham's razor, as I wrote. Beyond that, the very question whether He is one or not is not well defined. I know what a person is, so when I see two human beings I say they are two. But God Himself could be defined as a combination of several entities. So what exactly does the question even mean—whether He is one or not?
We have a tradition that He is one, and that reveals that the product of the physico-theological argument—which could have been many—is one.
When you choose, that does not mean making a guess or drawing lots. It means you do not have a decisive argument or observation. So do it based on other considerations: tradition, common sense, Ockham's razor, and so on.
Look for Edward Feser's book Five Proofs of the Existence of God. There he shows logically why God is one. It is connected to the fact that He lacks potentials, and entities can be distinguished from one another only if they have potentials.
"The Unmoved Mover," could you elaborate more on the argument?
Okay, there is no necessity—but is there some logical or philosophical argument, or anything else, that explains why it is דווקא one? Because according to Judaism there is one God—"…the Lord is our God, the Lord is one"—in a very clear way that cannot be interpreted otherwise. What could lead me to conclude that it is specifically one? You say to choose according to my understanding, but you can't choose truth. Truth is what it is, not what seems right to me or what I feel like. How can one arrive at it objectively? Or maybe that is not always possible, and perhaps all that remains is to make a guess…