Does God Exist?

The Teleological Argument from Design states that the universe exhibits a complex, pervasive order or design. Since any time there is such a design there is a designer, it follows that the universe must then have a designer. The name for that designer is “God” or “Allah”, so God exists.

Humans are tinkerers. We take things apart, see how they look, and then put them back together again, often in different orders. For example, we take plants apart. We look at them in smaller and smaller pieces at greater and greater magnitudes. We cut up animals in the same way, then we try to find the tastiest parts. After that, we find uses for the rest of the parts that we didn’t eat. We cut up trees for lumber and paper. Cut through mountains to build roads. We have this natural tendency to take nature apart then we use the parts as we see fit. We mine minerals, rock, and ore, to make tools to help us take nature apart and to use what we take apart more efficiently. As we dismember nature we also study it to see how it works, then we mimic it in ways beneficial to us. Nature gives us seasons, so we make clocks and calendars to chart it. Nature makes complex brains composed of different parts doing different things allowing animals to be intelligent. Humans make computers to do essentially the same thing. We seem to borrow ideas from nature, but it’s not really borrowing since we ourselves are part of nature. Some animals have thick hides that protect them, we make clothing that does the same. As intelligent beings it is natural for us to ask question such as, “What exactly is it that we are copying here?” and “Have these natural things that we mimic been ‘thought up’ by something more intelligent than us?” The analogy that since our human designs require a designer, then natural designs must have a designer too, insists on a very close bond between human kind and nature, a link like a mother to a child. If the very atoms that make up our body come from the Earth itself and were put together into a very complex organism, just like mother and child then it is reasonable to assume that our intelligence mimicks nature too.

A watchmaker is to a watch’s design as nature is to the universe's design. No, nature is not an actual mother pumping out new designs from her womb, and birthing them from some huge vagina, nor is the universe a giant watchmaker in the sky, but the analogy still holds. Nature creates everything, and from the dirt and rock of its womb everything that has shape or design on this planet from it’s atomic level to it’s technological level has come about from natural evolutionary forces here on earth. I’m not saying that there aren’t other planets with intelligences as well, or that earth’s intelligence is the greatest intelligence, it’s just that our human intelligence and design, so far as we know, has come about through seemingly intelligent evolutionary processes happening here on earth. Here is where the problems start. Lots of smart people have given names to this apparent intelligence, Evolution, Mother Nature, Gaia, God, Brahma, etc. Because our social nature which creates relationships combines with our ability to “believe”, we humans create strong emotional ties to some of these names and concepts that we personify, and then we argue about which one is more right.

It absolutely does not follow that since the universe exhibits design that there must only be one God designing it. Monotheism says that there is only one God, but I don’t buy it. If we take the watchmaker analogy a bit further, it would be absurd to believe that the only thing humankind has ever designed was watches. There are shoemakers, and computer parts makers, and drinking straw makers, and building makers, and book makers, and car makers, ad infinitum! It makes sense that nature could have planet makers and, solar system makers, and plant makers, and animal makers, and quasar makers, and nebula makers, and ant makers, and moon makers, and rainbow makers, etc.

Maybe all of those moon makers, and planet makers, and rainbow makers, and animal makers also have a maker or designer. I’ll be honest, I can’t deny that as a possibility, but is there ever a stop to this line of reasoning? Does our universal designer have a designer, and was its designer designed by yet another designer? My point is there is no reason why there can’t be many gods, and I believe the bible (one of monotheisms magnum opus’s) backs me up on this. I choose to discuss an objection that is not grounded in there being something wrong with the teleological argument’s logic, such as its validity or its soundness. I chose an objection that actually agrees with the basic idea that the things we see in nature have been intelligently designed. What I am objecting against is not the argument itself, but the specific Abrahamic religious intent in the wording of the arguments conclusion. My objection is with monotheism specifically, not with intelligent design.

Here’s what I have to say to monotheists. In the King James version of the bible specifically in Exodus chapter 20, verse 3, the first commandment of God to Moses states, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” First of all, I want to make it very clear here that the words do not say, “I am the only God, and there are no other gods.” The words themselves speak of other gods, and that you are not supposed to have any of them before the god of Israel. This rule was given to the people of Israel as part of a covenant between a particular family and this particular god. I’ll grant that the god of Abraham is certainly popular these days, but to be honest, I don’t really want much to do with it. It is our intimate relationship with earth and nature, by watching the patterns and using the parts that we humans have prospered and advanced.

The Teleological Argument from Design supports the idea of fideism rather than actually helping to prove the existence of God. It shows that it is unnecessary to use reason to try to legitimize religious beliefs. The question, “does God exist?” is a Christian/Muslim/Jewish question and can only make sense to someone with some understanding of Christian, Muslim, or Jewish ideas, and the Teleological Argument from Design provides a logical answer. The question itself(does God exist?) infers that there is a God who might or might not exist, and any argument is going start with that basic assumption. The answer is “yes” before it is even asked.

I could rewrite the teleological argument to say this, “The universe exhibits a complex, pervasive order or design. Any time there are such designs there are designers, therefore it follows that the universe must then have designers. The being that designs things here on earth is named Mother Nature. Therefore Mother Nature exists.” We have no rational justification that either God or Mother Nature actually exist yet either, both or neither might. Even with these two versions of the teleological argument, we still either believe or we don’t believe. The use of reason in the teleological argument seems to prove the existence of God, yet it also seems to prove the existence of Mother Nature, or Brahma, or whatever label that you wish to insert in to the question, “does ______ exist?”.

Our reason has this natural tendency to want to validate our beliefs or invalidate conflicting beliefs. So the conclusion of the Teleological Argument by Design doesn’t prove God exists, it merely utilizes natures apparent intelligent designs to validate a belief that he might.