Below was my reflection paper for my Philosophy of Religion class. The teacher asked each of us to pick one of the pro-God arguments, fully explain it and relate it with us and our God. The candidate arguments are: religious experience, cosmological, ontological, teleological, and Pascal's wager. As explained in the paper, I chose the teleological argument or argument from design. I just realized, after rereading it after it was graded and returned, that the fourth paragraph was unnecessarily lengthy. It explains why it's implausible to think that the universe was created out of chance or random combination. I was just making sure that this claim would be totally refuted so that the intelligent design argument can easily be defended. *sigh* Whatever. The important thing is the paper was marked with a satisfying grade. :)
*****************************
INTELLIGENT DESIGN
Before, it was called creationism. Religious groups, especially the Christian ones, pleaded with their secular governments to include this argument in educational curriculums. However, this argument was deemed not exactly as an argument, a logical argument that is, but a spiritual belief. And basically, spirits or souls and the like are banned by law to be formally taught in schools unless these schools or the state itself is sectarian. Besides, creationism as a theory is incompatible with Darwin’s scientifically acknowledged and widely accepted theory of evolution. Thus, it is not appropriate for both arguments to be preached alongside with each other.
Not long ago, I have encountered an online article about intelligent design, which sounded scientific and interesting to me. But as I was reading it, I discovered that intelligent design was just creationism renamed. The coining of the new name was an attempt to make creationism appear philosophical and scholastic so it may be acceptable for inclusion in the secular curriculum. But it was a futile attempt. Whether it is creationism or intelligent design, it still points to the belief that God created the universe.
Intelligent design, also called the teleological or design argument, states that man, nature, the world, and the rest of the universe, with all their harmonious intricacies, must have been purposely “designed” and created by an intelligent being. The body’s different organs working in unison, an ecosystem where various organisms are interdependent together with the environment, and the fact that no two or more inanimate planets are placed in a single orbit are just some of the fascinating phenomena operating with uncanny patterns and elaborate mechanisms. The teleological argument explains that these detailed arrangements in nature are possible only with an “intelligent purposing mind” that planned and created them. Since this intelligence is responsible for the existence and behavior of everything in the universe, it must then be the most superior intelligence belonging to the most powerful being above all. And this being is God.
Suppose that you have never seen a watch. One day, you saw one on the ground and picked it up. You observed that they were made of glass and metals, which are materials familiar to you. You saw the two main hands pointing at two of the 12 numbers around them. You later discovered that it was a device that tells time. You pried the watch’s back open and were amazed by the different tiny components. You inspected how these minute parts work together so that the hands point at the right numbers at the right duration to refer to the exact time of the day. You then wonder how this very complex object came to be. Since every component of the watch is inanimate, they could have not possibly come together and arranged themselves to form this time-telling device. Perhaps these components did come together and were assembled, not by their own will however, but by coincidence. Out of the innumerable possible combinations of different metals, glasses, ink (for printing the numbers), and other materials, one of them has successfully produced the watch and its intricate mechanism to serve its purpose. But such process would take billions or even more years to take place. Furthermore, such process only produced this single watch along with the other rejected combinations that eventually ceased to exist since none of them served a purpose. In this case, each object in the universe was a product of random combination; that among the countless combinations, only those that have purpose can be allowed to exist. By the law of probability however, if everything in the universe was a result of random combination, then the number of all combinations of atoms made to accidentally create the present universe must have been much, much greater than the already incalculable number of all existing objects in the universe. Furthermore, the occurrence of these relatively few successful combinations, which resulted to the existing universe, has an extremely low probability. For these successful combinations to certainly exist, infinite time should be given for all the innumerable random combinations to take place. But infinity is implausible. The finite number of all existing objects must have been created within a finite time.
After that lengthy analysis, you then conclude that the watch that you just picked up could’ve not been accidentally created by pure chance. The only feasible explanation is that the watch must’ve had a maker. Only another intelligent being could be the reason behind the watch’s existence, its intricate characteristics, and its purpose. Maybe you have not met the watchmaker and seen how it was created. But you can be certain that at some time and some place, the watch was being directly created by an intelligent watchmaker, who didn’t have to tediously try all arbitrary combinations.
Similarly, the universe must have had a maker. Man alone is made up of clever mechanisms to survive and protect himself. The Earth itself contains numerous systems in natural phenomena, such as in the change of seasons or the process of producing rain. The rest of the universe moves in an organized manner such that collision of heavenly bodies is at least minimized, if not completely prevented. The existence and synchronization of everything there is can not be possible with utter randomness. Only power and will can create an object out of nothing and stir up events. Only intelligence can devise the intricacies of the harmonious universe. Only goodness and love can decide the Earth’s purpose, which is to support human life. This power and will, intelligence, and goodness and love can only belong to an existing being – God.
Having a sceptic disposition, I was not satisfied with a faith based on sheer dogma. I was more comfortable with owning beliefs and convictions that I can rationally defend. Seeking a logical argument as a strong foundation for my faith in God was difficult. I can easily think of refuting replies to all the arguments, which I have so far encountered, for His existence, except one – the design argument or intelligent design.
I thought at first that intelligent design was no match for the evolution theory. The idea of man as a result of evolution brought about by the need to adapt to the changing environment is more comprehensible, and thus more acceptable, than the belief that an unseen creator crafted man and everything else out of void. It was mentioned in the aforementioned online article that even the Roman Catholic Church favoured evolution over creationism in formal education. Now as a follower of that church, how can I defend the Genesis? In the first place, how the Bible stories and revelations happened is much less essential than the message they imply. As my church preaches, the Bible should not be taken as a history book that must correspond with reality. Instead, as mushy as it sounds, it should be taken as compiled love letters from God expressed in symbols and riddles. The story of Creation was simply a figurative way of saying that God made everything out of purpose and love. Perhaps what actually happened was that God indirectly created man by altering the environment of selected monkeys so that they were forced to “mutate” into intelligent, less-hairy primates that could stand straight. Evolution itself must also be part of God’s design.
I remember a religion teacher back in high school saying that there should be no conflict between science and religion. Science tells how, while religion tells who, she said. Maybe it’s supposed to stay that way. The belief in a Creator is something spiritual that should not be introduced as something logical in academics. Perhaps I have been wasting ‘thinking time’ for seeking a rational explanation for God’s existence. Human intelligence is limited. Therefore, it may be unsound to use logic from our limited minds to measure and confine the immeasurable and unlimited God with finite characteristics. Maybe, just maybe, God also designed human intelligence to be limited. This way, belief in Him would be based not solely on safe, rigid logic but on mysterious, intuitive trust, which what true faith is.
Ye, Filipinos, shall despair. Thy self-proclaimed, not to mention grotesquely ugly, hero shall fall before one of the Mexicans he has been assassinating. He then shall lose his commercial endorsements, singing contract (which he doesn’t deserve!), bragging rights, and, thank God, his fantasies of being a drop-dead gorgeous guy, which is the opposite of what he really is!
