The Teleological and Kalam Cosmological Arguments Revisited (Palgrave Frontiers in Philosophy of Religion)

A prominent issue in many contemporary philosophy of religion debates concerns whether the universe has a Designer. This book moves the discussion ahead in a significant way by devising an original deductive formulation of the Teleological Argument (TA) which demonstrates that the following are the only possible categories of hypotheses concerning fine-tuning and order: (i) chance, (ii) regularity, (iii) combinations of regularity and chance, (iv) uncaused, and (v) design. This book also demonstrates that there are essential features of each category such that, while the alternatives to design are unlikely, the Design Hypothesis is not, and that one can argue for design by exclusion without having to first assign a prior probability for design. By combining the TA with the Kalam Cosmological Argument (KCA) which it defends against various objections, this book responds to the God-of-the-gaps objection by demonstrating that the conclusion of the KCA-TA is not based on gaps which can be filled by further scientific progress, but follows from deduction and exclusion. This is an open access book. Acknowledgements 7 Contents 9 List of Figures 13 1: Introducing the Quest for an Explanation 14 1.1 Introduction 14 1.2 A Review of the Discussion 15 1.3 Problems with Scientism 21 1.4 Problems with Verificationism 25 1.5 In Defence of the Possibility of a Priori Metaphysical Knowledge 26 1.6 Reply to the Evolutionary Objection Against Metaphysical Knowledge 34 1.7 Reply to Empiricist Objections 35 1.8 Conclusion and Overview of Following Chapters 40 Bibliography 45 2: Causation and Laws of Nature 50 2.1 Introduction 50 2.2 Defining the Key Terms of the Causal Principle 52 2.3 Causation, Fundamental Physics, and Laws of Nature 59 2.4 Considerations of Quantum Indeterminancy 73 Bibliography 78 3: Arguments for the Causal Principle 84 3.1 Introduction 84 3.2 Objection: The Initial State of Reality (ISOR) is the Only Thing That Begins Uncaused 89 3.3 Against 1.1.1. Brute Fact 93 3.4 Against 1.1.2. Abstract Entities 100 3.5 Against 1.1.3.1 S is a Property of x 106 3.6 Concerning 1.1.3.2.1 112 3.7 Concerning 1.1.3.2.2. S is a Property of y 112 3.8 Concerning 1.1.3.2.3. S is a Property of the Circumstances of y 113 3.8.1 Objection: Current Spatial Considerations Prevent Things from Beginning to Exist Uncaused Now 113 3.8.2 Objection Based on the Distinction between Different Senses of Beginning to Exist 116 3.8.3 Objection: Pre-existing Things Such as a Pre-existent Law of Nature Might Prevent Things from Beginning to Exist Uncaused Now 118 3.8.4 A Second Form of Modus Tollens Argument 125 3.9 Objection Concerning the Distinction between Could and Would 134 3.10 Objection: The Causal Principle is Inconsistent with Libertarian Freedom 137 3.11 Objection Based on Lack of Directionality 138 3.12 Epistemological Objections 142 3.13 Conclusion 144 Bibliography 149 4: Fine-Tuning and Order of our Universe 153 4.1 Introduction 153 4.2 Fine-Tuning and Orderliness 154 4.2.1 Fine-Tuning 154 4.2.2 Orderliness 156 4.2.2.1 Introduction 156 4.2.2.2 Objection: Human Creation 158 4.2.2.3 Platonic Objection 161 4.2.3 Summary 165 4.3 A Logically Exhaustive List of Categories of Possibilities 165 4.4 Chance Hypothesis 177 4.4.1 The Argument from Selection Bias and Chaos 177 4.4.2 Anthropic Principle 180 4.4.3 Improbable Event Happens 181 4.4.4 The Problem of Normalizing Probabilities 186 4.4.5 Multiple Universes 187 4.4.5.1 Introducing Various Types of Multiverse Hypothesis 187 4.4.5.2 Insufficient Evidence for the Atheistic Multiverse Hypothesis 188 4.4.5.3 Arguments against the Atheistic Multiverse Hypothesis 190 4.5 Regularity 193 4.6 Combination of Regularity and Chance 195 4.7 Conclusion 197 Bibliography 201 5: Arguments for a First Cause 207 5.1 Introduction 207 5.2 Scientific Issues 207 5.3 Introducing the Philosophical Arguments Against an Infinite Regress of Causes and Events 216 5.4 Argument Against Traversing an Actual Infinite 218 5.5 The Argument from the Viciousness of Dependence Regress 236 5.6 Can a First Cause Be Avoided by a Causal Loop? 247 5.7 Conclusion 249 Bibliography 252 6: What the First Cause Is 258 6.1 Introduction 258 6.2 The First Cause Is Uncaused, Beginningless, and Initially Changeless 260 6.3 Transcendent and Immaterial 273 6.4 The First Cause Has Libertarian Freedom 276 6.4.1 How Could the First Cause Bring about the First Event from an Initially Changeless State 276 6.4.2 Should We Call It Libertarian Freedom? 283 6.4.3 Is the First Event Random? 285 6.4.4 Libertarian Freedom and Time 289 6.4.5 Contradiction with Classical Theism 296 6.5 The First Cause Has Tremendous Power 298 6.6 Conclusion 300 Bibliography 302 7: Ultimate Design 308 7.1 Introduction 308 7.2 Against the ‘Uncaused’ Hypothesis 308 7.3 In defence of Design 313 7.4 Reply to Hume’s Classic Objections 326 7.5 Addressing an Objection to Argument by Exclusion 327 7.6 Response to Difficulties Concerning Determining the Prior Probability that God Design the Universe 329 7.7 Reply to Objections Concerning the Range of Explanatory Latitude 333 7.8 Conclusion 337 Bibliography 340 8: Ultimate Designer 344 8.1 Summary of Important Conclusions from Previous Chapters 344 8.2 Concerning the God-of-the-Gaps Objection 347 8.3 Limitations of the KCA-TA and responses 351 8.4 Significance of the Conclusion of KCA-TA 358 Bibliography 361 Bibliography 364 Index 394 'An innovative examination and defence of the cosmological and teleological arguments - accessible to the non-expert but pushing the debate into new territory with great originality and verve.' - T. J. Mawson, Oxford University, UK 'Andrew Loke's book provides an up-to-date assessment of the Teleological and Kalam Cosmological Arguments, including a thorough response to contemporary objections. It advances the discussion concerning the ultimate origin of the universe and makes a significant contribution to the field of philosophy of religion and the dialogue between science and religion.' - William Lane Craig, Biola University, USA 'This book provides an engaging guide to two important features of our universe - it seems to have had a beginning, and its ability to support life is remarkably rare - and their deeper implications. Up-to-date, wide-ranging and highly recommended.' - Luke Barnes, Western Sydney University, Australia A prominent issue in many contemporary philosophy of religion debates concerns whether the universe has a Designer. This book moves the discussion ahead in a significant way by devising an original deductive formulation of the Teleological Argument (TA) which demonstrates that the following are the only possible categories of hypotheses concerning fine-tuning and order: (i) chance, (ii) regularity, (iii) combinations of regularity and chance, (iv) uncaused, and (v) design. This book also demonstrates that there are essential features of each category such that, while the alternatives to design are unlikely, the Design Hypothesis is not, and that one can argue for design by exclusion without having to first assign a prior probability for design. By combining the TA with the Kalam Cosmological Argument (KCA) which it defends against various objections, this book responds to the God-of-the-gaps objection by demonstrating that the conclusion of the KCA-TA is not based on gaps which can be filled by further scientific progress, but follows from deduction and exclusion. This is an open access book. Andrew Loke is Associate Professor, Department of Religion and Philosophy, Hong Kong Baptist University, China