Archive for Tuesday, November 30, 2004

Law and order

November 30, 2004

Advertisement

To the editor:

In the March 19 and Oct. 28 articles written by Leonard Krishtalka concerning natural law and intelligent design, Krishtalka declares intelligent design to be a "religious parable" and states that there is no need to believe in an intelligent designer because science alone can explain the complexities of nature. Obviously the intelligent designer referred to is God. But is the belief in God really necessary to observe order and design in creation?

Krishtalka himself recognizes the chemical, biological and geological complexities. Did Krishtalka's conviction in a designer cause him to observe this complexity or did he observe it because it exists? Furthermore, Krishtalka lists many physical laws that govern creation (March 19), e.g. Newton's laws of motion. But what is the ultimate function and purpose of law?

Whether it is physical laws governing the universe, natural law governing human conduct, or statutory and customary law governing the commonwealth, law by its nature brings order and predictability. It is impossible for any scientist to propose law while observing chaos (complete disorder and lawlessness).

Krishtalka proved that order and design exist. He did so without the belief in a "designer." This shows that his observations did not rely on religious presuppositions. However, they may have religious implications. Why? Because it not only requires a rational intelligence to comprehend law; it requires a rational intelligence to promulgate law.

Jackie Heim,

Lawrence

Commenting has been disabled for this item.