"Science may explain the world, but we still have to explain science. The laws which enable the universe to come into being. If physics is the product of design, the universe must have a purpose, and the evidence of modern physics suggests strongly to me that the purpose includes us. Paul Davies was reported to have said in an azquote.
Contents
Thomas Aquinas's 5th way for the Existence of God ……...….……………………….….…1
A Teleological Process.………………………………………………………...…….…..…......…2
Teleomatic Process in Inanimate Objects….…....………..…………………….……………….3
Teleonomic Process Living Organisms ………………………...……………...…………………6
Limitations in Living Organism………..……………………….…....………………..………..…7
Haldane’s Dilemma ………………………………………….....………………………………..…8
Mutations…………………………………………………………………………….....…………..10
An Example Organism……………………………………………………………….....…………11
Haldane Dilemma Still Problem…………………………………………………...………….…11
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………….....…………12
In Summa Contra Gentiles, Thomas Aquinas describes his natural theology. He argues that human beings and everything else in the universe are moving towards a good end goal. He goes on to explain that even those things that have no consciousness are directed towards a natural end that is good.[1] In the modern era, many believe that Darwin’s theory of evolution based on random mutations in the genome has destroyed all biological teleological arguments.[2] Others believe that Newton’s explanation of how objects move in his famous book The Principia destroyed all of the physical teleological arguments. Thomas Aquinas’s Teleological argument for the existence of God is still applicable in our contemporary context because both teleomatic and teleonomic processes have end goals that are non-thermodynamic and non-kinematic which indicates God’s direction.
Thomas Aquinas's 5th way for the existence of God
The following is Thomas Aquinas’s fifth proof of the existence of God.
The fifth way is taken from the governance of the world. We see that things that lack intelligence, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that not fortuitously, but designedly, do they achieve their end. Now whatever lacks intelligence cannot move towards an end, unless it is directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the arrow is shot to its mark by the archer. Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end, and this being we call God.[3]
The first lesson in kinematics always begins with a description of what rest means in Physics. The term rest goes back to Aristotle's description of how things move. Aristotle taught that objects have potential because they will try to actualize to a final rest state. When they are in this final rest state, they have no motion because there is no potential to actualize. Aquinas took Aristotle’s Physics principles and applied them to the function of the universe in his fifth proof of the existence of God.[4] Therefore, just like Aristotle taught an apple falls from the tree to the ground to reach its final rest state. Thomas Aquinas taught that everything in the universe is also moving towards a rest state. This rest state is good because God is directing it to that final state.
In Aristotle's physics and metaphysics, everything in the universe was explained in terms of moving to a goal state. In other words, Aquinas thought in terms of teleological physics. In teleological physics, the goal for solids was to reach the object's center. The goal of fire was to reach the periphery and the goal of heavenly bodies was to move in a circle. Because he believed in teleological physics, he argued God directed the entire universe to these goals.[5]
A Teleological Process
The teleological process comes in two forms, teleomatic and teleonomic. In the teleomatic process, the goal state is externally determined by the natural laws of nature and is usually associated with inanimate objects. The teleonomic process is the process associated with living organisms. In the teleonomic process, the goal is determined internally.[6]
In other words, a teleomatic event is an event that is thermodynamic in its directive. A thermodynamic or kinetic directive is an event that can be explained by the laws of thermodynamics or the laws of motion. The following are examples of thermodynamic events, a rusting object, a coffee cup that is cooling, an object that rusts when exposed to the elements, or the cooling process of coffee. These processes are responding to the thermodynamic directive. Teleomatic events are those events that are solely attributed to the thermodynamic or kinetic directive.[7]
A teleonomic process is a process that is not a consequence of the laws of thermodynamics or laws of motion. In other words, it has to have a “primary non-thermodynamic” directive for the event. Teleonomic events cannot be discerned directly but indirectly by the consequences of their actions. A prime example would be cell division. Cell division is a series of chemical reactions that follow the laws of thermodynamics and kinematics but the reactions are not what is “directing” the cell. The cell’s goal is to divide. Cell division is what is directing the event.[8]
Teleomatic process in inanimate objects
Genesis makes a distinction between living and inanimate objects. One of the distinctions is the boundaries that God places on inanimate objects and the boundaries that God places on living organisms. Inanimate objects God set into place to mark the time and the seasons. In other words, they have regular patterns. For something to have a regular pattern, it means it is in a mathematical relationship with something else and the forces that are acting on them are in equilibrium. This is something that science teachers always try to instill in their students, how to recognize mathematical relationships by looking at a graph of the results. For example, if two variables form a straight line we know the two variables are in a linear relationship and both variables are either increasing or decreasing. If the two variables when graphed form a U then we know there is a quadratic relationship. Moons, planets, and stars that orbit each other all form regular patterns that follow Kepler’s Laws of Motion. Newton showed that it was the difference in speed at the perigee and apogee that kept the object in orbit and that these objects always formed an ellipse. Using Kepler’s laws of motion the objects in the heavens can be accurately predicted.[9]
When Issac Newton came along in 1687 and wrote his famous book Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, and proved that the laws that governed objects in space were the same as the laws that governed the objects here on earth. Most scientists discarded Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle's teleological physics. However, just because man can explain why something occurs does not mean that God did not set things in place.
Planets, the sun, galaxies, and other celestial bodies are all where they need to be for life to exist on this planet and even for our planet to exist. The only reason Earth exists and is in the orbit it is in is because of the fine-tuned constants of nature. Just like the archer had to aim at the target calculating all of the variables that could affect the trajectory of the arrow. God gave the universe the constants it has so all bodies with a lack of intelligence would end up at the prescribed end God wanted them in.[10]
The reason why these constants have the values that they do is an open question in science. Many hoped that String Theory would answer the fine-tuning of the constants of nature. But when it was discovered that the equations of string theory could be solved somewhere on the order of 10500 different ways a new solution had to be found. Since the solution could not be found in a materialistic universe a search started in a metaphysical universe. Many cosmetologists today believe there are an infinite number of universes each one of these universes corresponds to a different solution in string theory. They concluded that we live in a multiverse, not a universe.[11]
It is not possible to observe or even visit most of these other universes because the constants in those universes would be different than the constants in this universe. It is theorized the universes that we could visit would contain replicas of us. The connection between Buddhist and Hindu belief is undeniable and self-evident to anyone familiar with Buddhism and Hinduism.[12] There is no observational evidence of a multiverse; it is simply the result of the failure of string theory to solve the fine-tuning problem.[13]
A teleological event is an event in which there is an indirect goal that is seen as a consequence of the event. The consequence of laws of thermodynamics and kinematics operating with the fundamental constants of nature is a planet and universe conducive to life.
In Thomas’s fifth proof for the existence of God, he said that all things are moving to the position that God wanted them to be in and the only way the inanimate objects could get to that location was because an intelligent being had to guide them into that position. Modern observation describes the fundamental constants of nature with specific values that cause the objects in our universe to be the places they are in. Not only is Thomas Aquintas’s fifth proof still relevant today scientists are trying to disprove the teleological argument today. Objects are where God placed them because of the values of the constants of nature that He set.
Teleonomic Process Living Organisms
Genesis also describes the limitations God placed on living organisms. God limited life to only producing within its kind. For thousands of years, humans have been breeding animals, dogs, pigs, horses, and cows just to name a few. The principles for breeding animals are very well known. These could be considered man-made teleonomic events. If the desired outcome is a larger dog then two large dogs have to be mated and a larger dog may be the result. If the desired outcome is long hair then the two dogs with the longest hair will be mated. The observation made through all of the millennia that man has been mating animals is that the animal never changes the kind of animal that it is. A dog will still be a dog, and a cow will still be a cow.
It is a well-known fact in biology that goal-directed behavior is widespread in the organic world. Most activities that are associated with migration, food-getting, courtship, ontogeny, and all phases of reproduction are thought of as goal-oriented processes. It could be said that the “occurrence of goal-directed processes is perhaps the most characteristic feature of the world of living organisms.”[14]
Migration, food-getting, courtship, ontogeny, and reproduction all are the result of thermodynamic and kinematic interactions but these interactions are not the result. Simple chemical reactions in the brain cannot explain how migration happens. Chemical reactions cannot explain the mating. The goal of mating is outside of the thermodynamic reactions that produce that event therefore they can be considered teleonomic events.
Limitations in Living Organism
Being able to breed animals indicates that there can be variety within a kind. This variety in kinds to most biologists would be called evolution. However, this kind of “evolution” could not account for how gerbils and giraffes came from a common ancestor. Or how Buffalo, buzzards, pigs and petunias, yaks, and yeast all come from a common ancestor.[15] One thing that both those who believe God created all the life that we observe and those who believe that some unknown process made the life we observe agree on is that the only way to cross the kind barrier, that God put into place, is through beneficial mutation.
Just like there are mathematical laws that govern how inanimate objects behave in nature there are mathematical laws that govern how animals procreate and how fast new traits are manifested throughout a population. Before Darwin’s theory creationists believed that organisms were designed for survival. Survival would be teleonomic because the goal of surviving would be outside any type of reaction that follows the laws of thermodynamics. Survival of the fittest was not a foreign idea they just believed the function was different. They believed that survival of the fittest was one of God's mechanisms for survival. Organisms used survival of the fittest to eliminate defective organisms and for organisms to adapt to new environments.[16]
Haldane’s Dilemma
In the 1950’s an evolutionary geneticist found a way to calculate the maxim genetic change due to differential survival. To his dismay what he found was that many species of higher vertebrates could not evolve in the available time. He found that population size and genetic fixation in species follow mathematical laws just the stars and the planets.[17] If organisms could not have evolved in the available time then they had to have a directive outside of the laws of genetics to multiply and fill the earth and the creation of life had to be a teleological event. An in-depth study of what has become known as Haldane’s Dilemma is outside the scope of this writing. However, a brief overview will be given.
In every generation, there are those organisms in every species that have offspring and those that do not have any offspring and die this can occur for a variety of reasons. The survivors can be referred to as genetic survivors because they passed their genetic makeup to the next generation. Those who died without any offspring can be classified as genetically dead. Breeding animals would be an example of artificially controlling the genetic outcome. The breeder picks the genetic survivor and he makes sure all others are genetically dead by not letting them breed. Five types of genetic deaths can occur, death by mutation, death by segregation, death by balancing, death by gene substitution, and death by random events. For any species to survive it has to obey the following equation. Births + 1 = survivors + mutation deaths + segregation deaths + balancing deaths + Substitution deaths + random death. Haldane put in terms of costs and payments. The cost would be the deaths by each one of the reasons and payments would be excess births to pay for the deaths that are occurring.[18]
What Haldane discovered is the cost of genetic substitution has a cost of 30 and it is paid in installments of 0.1 per generation. Haldane calculated that it takes 300 generations to pay the cost of one substitution.[19] When Haldane’s calculations are applied to “human evolution” it makes the idea of ape-to-human evolution untenable and the creation of man being a teleological event mandatory. Using human evolution from the hypothetical ape ancestry as an example. This evolutionary chain of events supposedly took place over the last six to ten million years. Using ten million years as the time frame means only 1667 nucleotides could have been substituted. If humans are one percent different from the hypothetical ape ancestor then this would be 4 hundredths of a percent of the total difference.[20] This makes the idea of ape-to-human evolution untenable.
Haldane’s calculation of 300 generations is an average of how long it would take depending on whether the substitution is dominant or recessive.[21] One of the criticisms of Haldane’s Dilemma is that some changes occur in less than 300 generations. Haldane indicated that this can happen because the length of time depends on whether it is a dominant or recessive trait. Therefore, animals do have the ability to adapt so that they can survive but again survival is an indirect teleonomic the goal of surviving is not a result of thermodynamic processes. There is also evidence of a limitation on adaptation species.[22] This fixation extends out to the genus level.[23] This means when breeding animals such as dogs there is a point at which the dog will not become any larger or any smaller. Teleonomic adaptation can occur within limits.
Mutations
Evolution theory is dependent on spontaneous mutations to create new functions in an organism and extend past the genus-level boundary. Because of the random nature of mutations, the only way that mutations could be beneficial is if they were teleonomic. Mutations are fixed in the genome if the organism is under stress. Random mutations do not care about survival. Random mutations do not care whether an organism lives or dies. However, if mutations are not possible in a directed manner then all of life would have to be considered teleonomic. In other words, life was put on this planet for a reason.
Observations show that mutations are more likely to be deleterious, or neutral. Therefore, most mutations decrease rather than increase fitness.[24] The deleterious nature of mutations places a limit on the number of mutations that can occur per generation because of error catastrophe, which causes the organism to die. Error catastrophe occurs when the mutation rate is above one deleterious mutation per progeny; this translates into 0.5 harmful mutations per gamete per generation. Kimura estimates that mutations are ten times more likely to be harmful than even neutral.[25]
Using the supposed ape-to-human evolution and the difference between chimpanzee and human genomes would indicate that there would have to be 9.1 neutral mutations per year and 182 neutral mutations per generation. This would be well over one deleterious mutation per generation. This would indicate that the hypothetical ape-to-human evolution could not happen. This also indicates the teleonomic nature of life.
An Example Organism
God has put laws in place that limit the amount of change that can take place in organisms. According to Aquinas God the medium, that God uses to direct life to those goals are the laws of nature that He put into place directing all of life. In Genesis 1, God said that the creatures would increase and multiply by their kind. The only way for animals to bring forth a different kind is by mutation. Random mutation is the only theorized way to bring forth new information into the genome. Mutations cannot be random if they are moving towards the survival goal.
The longest experiment on the evolutionary theory is Lenski’s E. coli bacteria experiment. In that experiment, there were 12 “beneficial” mutations in 70,000 generations. Eleven of those were caused by a loss of function, and the twelfth was considered a new function as a result of new information, but the mechanism of this change is unknown.[26]
This experiment points to the teleonomic nature of life in general because from this experiment the length of time it would take for one beneficial mutation to form can be inferred. If this result is true for the hypothesized ape-to-human evolution as well, it would mean that there would only be enough time for eight mutations out of the thirty-five million needed for the difference between apes and chimpanzees.[27] At this rate, nothing could evolve because of mutation. All of life would have to be teleonomic.
Haldane Dilemma Still Problem
Haldane published his theory in 1957. Geneticists still have not discovered a solution for Haldane’s Dilemma as it is now called. In 2019, a new theory was proposed. In this theory, a distinction was made between organisms that reproduced asexually and those that reproduced sexually.[28] This distinction was made because asexual organisms do not undergo recombination whereas sexual organisms do.[29] The idea is that recombination is when strands of DNA are broken and repaired. These strands contain old data like when red hair skips a generation. Some a child may look like a grandparent.[30]
There are problems with using recombination as a purposeful process. One huge problem is that it is a random process. Even if the outside stressors on the organism would benefit from a certain combination, combining at that time there is no reason to assume that it will happen. A second reason is the most likely fate of unused DNA is random extinction not to be part of recombination. Recombination is limited to one event per chromosome arm.[31] Finally, the average rate of recombination in humans is 3,846 generations in a stretch of 10,000 nucleotides.[32] The problems with this theory make Haldane’s theory still a dilemma.
Conclusion
Not only is Aquinas's fifth proof of the existence of God still relevant it is still at the center of many of the current discussions today. It has been shown that there is a teleomatic nature to the constants of nature that govern the laws of thermodynamics and kinematics. God’s paintbrush for the universe is the laws and constants of nature that He set in place. As Monod said decades ago, biological systems are projective meaning that all organisms are looking to carry out a project, to hunt for food, to mate, to carry out research all of these goals are non-thermodynamic.[33] After centuries, the teleological argument for God still points to God.
Works Cited
[1] Sebastian Contreras, and Joaquin Garcia-Huidobro, “Teleology, Natural Desire and Knowledge of God in the Summa Contra Gentiles,” Imago temporis. (2015): 272.
[2] J.D. Rooney, “Evolutionary Biology and Classical Teleological Arguments for God’s Existence,” The Heythrop Journal 54, no. 4 (2013): 617. https://doi.org/10.1111/heyj.12036
[3] Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica. 1st complete American ed, / Literally translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province; with Synoptical charts, (New York: Benziger Bros., 1947), Question 2, Article 3.
[4] Ibid., 618.
[5] William P. Alston, "Arguments for the existence of God: the Teleological Argument." In Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, (Taylor and Francis, 1998).
[6] Matteo Mossio, and Leonardo Bich, "What Makes Biological Organisation Teleological?"
Synthese, (2017): 1092.
[7] Addy Pross, "On the Chemical Nature and Origin of Teleonomy," Origins of Life and Evolution of Biospheres 35, no. 4 ( 2005): 385, https://go.openathens.net/redirector/liberty.edu?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/on-chemical-nature-origin-teleonomy/docview/763692826/se-2.
[8] Addy Pross, "On the Chemical Nature and Origin of Teleonomy,” 386.
[9] I have taught physics for over twenty years. I have my yearly lesson on graphing and the mathematical equations that are visible when the results are graphed. In the lecture I go through how a quadratic relationship looks like a U, a direct relationship is a straight line and what an inverse relationship looks like. In physics and in Earth Science I go through Kepler’s laws of motion and how an object has to form an ellipse when orbiting another object because of the difference in tangential velocities at the apology and perigee.
I also go through Aristotle's views on Chemistry and Physics both of these views Aquinas would have been very familiar with. Aristotle believed that everything was made of air, fire, water and earth or solid, liquid, gas and fire. Democritus was a contemporary of Aristotle but Democritus’s atomic theory would not become the dominant theory for another 1500 years. The theory of the atom was not actually settled until Einstein’s miracle year of 1905 with his paper on Brownian motion.
[10] David Sloan, Rafael Alves Batista, Michael Townsen Hicks, and Roger L. Davies, eds. Fine-Tuning in the Physical Universe, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020), 3.
[11] Ibid., 3.; Universe or Multiverse? The Fabric of the Cosmos. Films On Demand. 2011. Accessed December 2, 2023. https://fod.infobase.com/PortalPlaylists.aspx?wID=96753&xtid=56051.
[12] Ana Alonso-Serrano, and Gil Jannes. "Conceptual Challenges on the Road to the Multiverse." Universe 5, no. 10 (2019): 212, https://go.openathens.net/redirector/liberty.edu?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/conceptual-challenges-on-road-multiverse/docview/2550279794/se-2.
[13] Universe or Multiverse?, 1:32.
[14] F. Vitale, "The Teleological Program. Ernst Mayr's Teleonomy from Philosphy to Cybernetics
(or Kant's Revenge)." Aishesis Pratiche, Linguaggi E Saperi dell'estetico 14, no. 2
(2022): 21.
[15] Michael J. Behe, The Edge of Evolution : The Search for the Limits of Darwinism, (Free Press, 2007), 8-9. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/liberty/detail.action?docID=4935043.
Created from liberty on 2023-12-03 09:16:04.
[16] Walter James ReMine, The Biotic Message: Evolution versus Message Theory, (Saint Paul: St.
Paul Science, 1993), 117.
[17] Ibid., 208.
[18] Ibid., 211-212.
[19] Ibid., 216.
[20] Ibid., 217.
[21] Ibid., 216.
[22] Nathaniel T. Jeanson, Replacing Darwin : The NEW Origin of Species, (Montreal: New Leaf Publishing Group, 2017),10-11. Accessed December 5, 2023. ProQuest Ebook Central.
[23] Nathan H. Lents, S Joshua Swamidass, and Richard E Lenski. “Michael J. Behe HarperOne,” Science. 363, no. 6427 (2019): 590.
[24] I. Martincorena, and N.M.Luscombe, “Non-random mutation: The evolution of targeted hypermutation and hypomutation”. Bioessays, 35, (2013): 124. https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.201200150; ReMine, The Biotic Message, 246.
In response Haldane’s Dilemma Motoo Kimura developed “Neutral theory,” which is based on population genetics.
[25] Ibid., 246.
[26] Lents, “Michael J. Behe Harper One,” 590.
[27] Ibid.,247.
[28] Donal A. Hickey, G Brian Golding, and S Xu. “Sex Solves Haldane’s Dilemma.” Genome. 62, no. 11 (2019): 761.
[29] Ibid., 762.
[30] Ibid., 765-766
[31]M. Lynch, “Scaling expectations for the time to establishment of complex adaptations,” Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102. no.38 (2010):16577. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1010836107. Epub 2010 Sep 7. PMID: 20823237; PMCID: PMC2944742.
[32] Michael Lynch, The Origins of Genome Architecture (Sunderland: Sinauer Associates, Inc., 2007), 87.
[33] Ibid., 384.
References
Alonso-Serrano, Ana, and Gil Jannes. "Conceptual Challenges on the Road to the Multiverse." Universe, 2019.
Alston, William P. "Arguments for the Existence of God: The Teleological Argument." In Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Taylor and Francis, 1998.
Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologica 1st Complete American. 1st Complete American. Translated Literally translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province & with Synoptical Charts. New York: Benziger Bros, 1947.
Behe, Michael J. The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism. Free Press, 2007.
Contreras, Sebastian, and Joaquin Garcia-Huidobro. "Teleology, Natural Desire and Knowledge of God in the Summa Contra Gentiles." Imago Temporis , 2015: 272.
Hickey, Donal A, G. Brian Golding, and S Xu. "Sex Solves Haldane's Dilemma." Genome 62, no. 11 (2019).
Jeanson, Nathaniel T. Replacing Darwin: The New Origin of Species. Montreal: New Leaf Publishing Group, 2017.
Lents, Nathaniel T, S Joshua Swamidass, and Richard E Lenski. "Michael J. Behe Harperone." Science (363) 6427 (2019).
Lynch, M. "Scaling Expectations for the Time to Establishment of Complex Adaptation." Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102, no. 38 (2010).
Lynch, Michael. The Origins of Genome Architecture. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates Inc, 2007.
Martincorena , I, and N.M. Luscombe. "Non-random Mutation: The evolution of Targeted Hypermutation and Hypomutation." Bioessays (35), 2019.
Mossio, Matteo, and Leonardo Bich. "What makes Biological Organisation Teleological?" Synthese, 2017.
Pross, Addy. "On the Chemical Nature of Origin of Teleomy." Origins of Life and Evolution of Biospheres, 2005.
ReMine, Walter James. The Biotic Message: Evolution Versus Message Theory. Saint Paul: St Paul Science, 1993.
Rooney, J.D. "Evolutionary Biology and Classical Teleological Arguments for God's Existence." The Heythrop Journal, 2013.
Sloan, David, Rafael Alves Batista, Michael Townsend Hicks, and Roger L. Davies. Fine-Tuning in the Physical Universe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020.
Universe or Multiverse? The Fabric of the Cosmos. Films On Demand, 2011.
Vitale, F. "The Teleological Program. Ernst Mayr's Teleonomy from Philosophy to Cybernetics (or Kant's Revenge)." Aishesis Pratiche, Linguaggi E Saperi dell'estetico, 2022.
Comments