An important objection to Design Arguments focuses on the premise that the existence of order and/or complexity presupposes the existence of conscious design. It is invalid to automatically infer the existence of a designer from the mere fact of order and regularity in nature — it's just a connection that has been arbitrarily made. In fact, order appears to be an inherent characteristic of the universe itself.
What would a universe without order look like? I don't know — and as often as I've asked theists this question, I've never managed to get a straight answer. I don't believe that they really know what a universe without order would look like, either, but if that is the case, how can they assume that their god is needed to impose the order? The simple response is that they cannot.
In general, order and complexity are dependent upon subjective judgments. Where one person may see order, another may see chaos. Where one person may see indecipherable complexity, another may see elegant simplicity. It would seem reasonable, then, to start out with a method of objectively measuring order, complexity, and chaos so that we can tell how much there is and whether or not that amount requires a Grand Designer. I have yet to meet a theist willing to attempt such a task.
It is interesting to note that while the theist will quickly point to the existence of order and natural laws as evidence of their god, they also won’t hesitate to claim that any event which appears to contravene those laws must be a miracle and, hence, also evidence of their god. When nature is not uniform, it is because of their god. When nature is uniform, it is because of their god. In this method of arguing theology, every exit is covered, nothing could support the contrary position, and the theist thinks he is insulated from any critique. Unfortunately, things don’t really work that way.
« What is the Argument To Design? | Does a God Need a Designer? »
