Argument
for the existence of God
I would like to argue today that the existence
of God can be discovered through self-contemplation
without obeying religious doctrines. Though
this is an uncommon argument for God, nonetheless,
it is an original one that deserves attention.
Therefore, instead of asserting an ethical
necessity for the existence of God - one
that the religious doctrine is based on
- we will begin by asking a simple philosophical
question: Is the universe a creation of
chance, or a creation of design?
The scientific enterprise has helped us
understand more about the mechanisms of
nature, the findings of which have been
astonishing. For example, we now know that
the life of the cell depends on the collective
actions of thousands of different protein
molecules. However, according to microbiologist
Michael Denton, the task of designing a
single protein molecule would be completely
beyond our capacity at present, despite
all our knowledge of physics and chemistry.
Yet, scientists feel even more overwhelmed
when trying to understand the nature of
the DNA. By cleverly directing ribosome
particles, the DNA can accomplish what seems
to be beyond comprehension: It can construct
itself without outside assistance! What
is more amazing is the fact that this remarkable
piece of mechanism, which has the capacity
to construct every living thing from an
oak tree to the human brain, is several
thousand million times smaller than the
smallest chip designed by humans.
Human intelligence is also another achievement
of nature, which has not been rivaled by
our technology. The human brain is so far
beyond our comprehension that it would be
impossible to model a machine as intelligent
as the brain. Despite remarkable effort
in the last two decades, for example, the
goal of artificial intelligence to mimic
the human mind has made little progress,
and such a goal still remains a dream. Perhaps,
applying the most sophisticated engineering
techniques, an intelligent machine similar
to the human brain would still require eternity
for its construction.
Even Charles Darwin acknowledged the mysterious
perfection of nature when he said, “The
eye to this day gives me a cold shudder.”
Yet, scientists know today that the eye
is a far more complex organ that it appeared
to Darwin a hundred years ago. The more
we learn about the mechanisms of nature,
the more we realize how little we actually
understand about the complexity of life.
Ingenuity in biological design is striking
because it helps us generate solutions to
problems in the technological field. We
would not have invented the camera and telescope,
for one, without studying the structure
of the eye. And, we would not have perceived
the ingenious design of the eye without
the discovery of the camera and telescope.
In this sense, there’s a strong logical
analogy between the nature of organisms
and of machines.
The sheer universality of perfection, which
is embodied in nature, puzzles even the
most hardcore atheists. When compared to
the level of complexity revealed by the
molecular structure of life, our most advanced
tools appear primitive. The fact that everywhere
we look, to whatever depth we look, we find
a design of absolute transcendence stands
opposed to the idea of chance.
It seems convincing, therefore, that the
universe may well be the creation of an
intelligent design. Just as we know a cutting-edge
computer is the handiwork of human intelligence,
the perfection of the universe seems to
necessitate the existence of an intelligent
designer, a designer that created life and
now sustains it through the laws of nature.
And, we may call this designer by the name
of God.
Of course, this conclusion may have religious
implications but it does not rely on religious
presuppositions.
I recommend reading “The Puzzle of Perfection”
by Michael Denton, for more insight into
the argument from design.
Barlas Esin in a journalism major and philosophy
minor at Cal State Long Beach. He can be
contacted at besin@csulb.edu.
|
