Q&A: Evolution and Challenges to the Physico-Theological Argument
Originally published:
This is an English translation (via GPT-5.4). Read the original Hebrew version.
Evolution and Challenges to the Physico-Theological Argument
Question
Hello Rabbi,
I just read your article about evolution and faith from "To Know Your Way in the Land."
- Regarding the argument of infinite universes—is it mistaken to say that by the same logic a detective could find a knife with DNA in the victim’s body and, instead of assuming that the owner of the DNA is the one who did it, suppose that there are simply infinitely many universes and therefore it could be that the evidence before us is just coincidence?
- Does the Rabbi mean that the argument simply says that from the very fact that at the end of a certain process there is something complex, that itself is evidence that it is reasonable to assume that at the beginning of the process there was an intelligence / factor that arranged for this to happen intentionally, and that the challenges are trying to add assumptions about what that process was supposed to look like or when we infer intelligence from a complex result (for example—only when we know that that object is usually created by intelligence, like an airplane)?
Answer
In principle, yes, although in the detective’s case we have experience with DNA being found in different places, which cannot be said about the creation of worlds.
I didn’t understand the second question.
Discussion on Answer
That brings us to the argument of the broken watch. See column 690.
In addition, it is possible that the laws of nature lead to the formation of human beings and everything needed in our world only if the rest of the universe is created as well. Therefore all of this was created. This is related to the argument in column 547 about constraints on the Holy One, blessed be He, in creation.
I was trying to make sure I understood the argument for why evolution does not undermine the physico-theological proof, but never mind.
Regardless, if we are already inferring from the fact that complex things do not arise on their own and assuming there is a creator—then there is another characteristic of an intelligent creator, namely that there is no waste / no unnecessary things (the Holy One, blessed be He, is also supposed to be all-wise). Why do we need an entire universe when only one grain of sand within it contains the complex thing? Isn’t it more reasonable to say that it really just arose by chance, and therefore there are countless additional galaxies in which nothing happens, than to say that there is a Creator and enormous quantities of His creation are simply beyond our understanding?
By the way, thank you for dedicating the time and for responding to questions.