I have applied the four causes of Aristotle
, because it is difficult to define. But nevertheless, an atheist/agnostic position must assume that chance was an apparent characteristic that preceded the universe and can exist without matter. As it must exist without matter in order to cause the first ever thing, in reality. I am arguing that chance is infact inherent to the universe.
It strikes me that chance, as a somewhat mysterious element of the universe, cannot be supported as being the cause of the universe anymore than a planet can. Chance
, like that of a planet
, is one product of THIS universe.
To give an example; suppose you produce a magnificent work of art. Does this mean that you can then infer that this work of art could have preceded the person, or in some manner predate him?
It seems to be a faulty position. If we apply Aristotle's four causes, chance's material cause
is not apparent, or there isn't one, as it isn't tangeable. It's efficienct cause
is the beginning of time and space
. It's formal cause
, or it's intended function
, is that it seems to allow for events to randomly happen so that order can be found. i.e. it serves as a helper of potential events
.(This is evident from observation of the evidence).
Formal cause could only refer to the essential quality of causation. A deeper contemplation reveals a formal cause as the ever existing truth of capacity. Thus, the capacity of the human genome to accompany the existence of a human being presumes that the capacity to be a human being pre-exists the human being.
The final cause
is that it allows for life and planets and star systems to evolve so that life and order can dwell. It apparent random and meaningless
nature is infact a necessary characteristic as we observe order in big numbers.
I don't think the final cause can be disputed, because all of the evidence is that this is reality (the universe), and that there is an observable purpose to the system. Assuming chance could create other realities, goes against the evidence that this is reality in it's full purpose/causes and that it is a cohesive system. The evidence shows this.
Philosophically, there's enough to conclude a designer.
, like time, is part of space/time, but it didn't precede space time, as far as I know, as it was all created at the same time. The formal causes of these major laws, could only be present in a designer.
Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.