Q&A: The Axiom of the Physico-Theological Proof
The Axiom of the Physico-Theological Proof
Question
Hello Rabbi, happy holiday,
Continuing our correspondence…
In the third notebook (quite fascinating), regarding the proof from the physico-theological argument, if I understood correctly, the proof relies largely on the simple philosophical axiom that it is impossible for a complex creation to come into being without an intentional intelligent cause directing it.
My question is: how can one answer an atheist who claims that for him this is not such a simple axiom? How can one show him that he is contradicting himself outright if he chooses not to accept this as an axiom? As I saw that you yourself have shown such inconsistency, for example among materialists (in my view that is the best argument when conducting a debate). I would be glad if you could give a few examples of this.
Thank you, and happy holiday!
Answer
In my experience, it is very difficult to argue with atheists in general, and on this issue in particular. Any example you bring from the world and from experience, he will say that this is true within the world of our experience, but not necessarily of the universe as a whole. In principle, this is the second law of thermodynamics (that in a closed system, without external intervention, there is no increase of order/complexity). But for the scientific question there are excuses (the accumulation of islands of order within chaos is indeed lawful). In the end, it remains a matter of impression and common sense.
A good example I once saw (I think on a Christian website) is from the SETI project (see Column 144), precisely because it is not taken from our experience but from creatures and worlds unfamiliar to us.
Joseph, your question is answered in my article (which the Rabbi disagrees with). In my opinion, many people miss the correct understanding of the claim that what is simple simply does not turn into something complex, etc.
See here the first article:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bws0Lni1BgE-bWhxZm8zWURrZVE
And here the second article:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oGDe7oV2YfSMS6wGXzcCHncph9jgjz6O/view
It is long, admittedly, but in my opinion if you read them in order, you will be convinced.