Divine Action, Design, and Natural Theology

This chapter reviews the debate about intelligent design as it emerged within biology. Then it treats the argument from design as represented by various features of the universe, like temporal and spatial order. The chapter argues that divine agency and divine action inform this debate by highlighting the identity of the agent who is the designer, by exposing how far one can specify the intentions and purposes of God in arguments from design, and by bringing to light two radically different ways of construing the place of natural theology in theology proper. It suggests further work is needed on this issue.

Beauty in Stoic Theological Arguments

This chapter is dedicated to analysing theological arguments in which aesthetic vocabulary plays a role. In these arguments, the beauty of the world is used to make an inference about its rational generation (an argument from design). To be precise, the arguments state that the presence of beauty in the world indicates that the world must have been generated by a rational principle and not by the random motion of atoms (as argued by the Epicureans). The chapter examines how beauty is used to form an inference here and investigates what theoretical implications this usage underpins. The findings here show some coherence with the findings in the previous chapters, especially in regard to the notion of good order or, to be more precise, well-functioning order. Thus, a systematic Stoic aesthetic theory begins to emerge.

Students’ “teleological misconceptions” in evolution education: why the underlying design stance, not teleology per se, is the problem

Teleology, explaining the existence of a feature on the basis of what it does, is usually considered as an obstacle or misconception in evolution education. Researchers often use the adjective “teleological” to refer to students’ misconceptions about purpose and design in nature. However, this can be misleading. In this essay, I explain that teleology is an inherent feature of explanations based on natural selection and that, therefore, teleological explanations are not inherently wrong. The problem we might rather address in evolution education is not teleology per se but the underlying “design stance”. With this I do not refer to creationism/intelligent design, and to the inference to a creator from the observation of the apparent design in nature (often described as the argument from design). Rather, the design stance refers to the intuitive perception of design in nature in the first place, which seems to be prevalent and independent from religiosity in young ages. What matters in evolution education is not whether an explanation is teleological but rather the underlying consequence etiology: whether a trait whose presence is explained in teleological terms exists because of its selection for its positive consequences for its bearers, or because it was intentionally designed, or simply needed, for this purpose. In the former case, the respective teleological explanation is scientifically legitimate, whereas in the latter case it is not. What then should be investigated in evolution education is not whether students provide teleological explanations, but which consequence etiologies these explanations rely upon. Addressing the design stance underlying students’ teleological explanations could be a main aim of evolution education.

2. Evolution and natural selection

In 1859 Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species, in which he set out his theory of evolution. The book marked a turning point in our understanding of the natural world and revolutionized biology. ‘Evolution and natural selection’ outlines the theory of evolution by natural selection, explaining its unique status in biology and its philosophical significance. It considers how Darwin’s theory undermined the ‘argument from design’, a traditional philosophical argument for the existence of God; how the integration of Darwin’s theory with genetics, in the early 20th century, gave rise to neo-Darwinism; and why, despite evolutionary theory being a mainstay of modern biology, in society at large there is a marked reluctance to believe in evolution.

PROOFS OF THE EXISTENCE OF GOD IN ISLAMIC THEOLOGY (KALAM)

The present article is devoted to the study of the proofs for the existence of God in the Mu‘tazilite, Ash‘arite and Maturidi schools of Kalam (Islamic rational/philosophical Theology). The arguments for God’s existence have been proposed by the doctors of Kalam are explicated in the context of their substantiation for the Quran’s assertion that God is First principle and the Ultimate cause of all creation. Of the many proofs for God’s existence — the cosmological, the teleological, and the ontological — only the cosmological type of argument was mostly pressed into service by Muslim theologians. The argument from design, though not overlooked completely, was not used as an independent proof for God’s existence. Some of the prominent As’arite thinkers, like al Ghazalī, combined kalam proofs with philosophical arguments for God’s existence have been utilized in the Islamic Peripatetic School. Special attention is given to the proofs for the existence of God proposed by Abu Mansur al-Maturidi (853–944), the founder and eponym of Maturidi Sunni Kalam school named after him. The analysis of his arguments is relevant due to the fact that Maturidi theological doctrine was the dominant source of theology, followed by most Sunni Hanafi Muslims in Central Asia, Kazakhstan, the Volga-Ural region, the European Part and Western Siberia of the former Russian Empire.

Ibn Rushd (Averroes). On the Methods of Proof for the Principles of Creed. Part One

The article offers for the first time a translation from Arabic into Russian of a treatise by Ibn Rushd (Averroes 1126–1198 AD), which deals with the islamic belief system (aqida). The treatise is of exceptional interest for both the students of theology and philosophy: it was authored by a philosopher who used the language of a theologian – a phenomenon that does not have a precedent in Muslim culture. Ibn Rushd here shapes his understanding of aqida by polemically using as a background the Asharite theology. In the translation is offered the first chapter of the treatise, which deals with proofs of the God’s existence. The arguments used by the representatives of the Kalam, such as dalil al-huduth (“de novitiate mundi”), the dalil al-jawaz (or dalil al-imkan, argument of “contingent mundi”)are critically assessed. They are juxtaposed to such Qur’anic arguments dalil al-`inaya argument “from design” or “de providentia” or the dalil al-ikhtira` “de inventione” or “de creatione”.