02.07.06


I dared to engage a Christian coworker of mine in a bit of theological debate yesterday, and met with the standard argument for a god that claims that the universe is too complex to have come about by chance; my coworker even went so far as to specifically level the Watchmaker Axiom, though she had trouble understanding my explanation as to why that particular theorem holds no water. But in a sudden epiphany, I realized the fundamental flaw with the complexity theorem.
       The standard claim that the Universe is too complex to have come about by chance -- despite being a preposterous argument for myriad reasons, including the Card Deal Rebuttal -- leads theists to claim that the Universe requires a Creator. So let's follow that line of argument for a moment to its logical conclusions -- if a Creator did in fact create the Universe, we must ask: is that Creator more complex than, as complex as, or less complex than the Universe?
       If we try to claim that the Creator of the Universe is less complex than the Universe, then we are implying that greater complexity can emerge from lesser complexity. Theists base their complexity argument on the premise that greater complexity cannot emerge from lesser complexity; if they concede to the notion of a Creator creating a Universe more complex than itself, then they negate their own argument, because the Universe just as easily could have developed toward greater complexity on its own. Claiming that their Creator is omnipotent does not circumvent the problem; if the theist abandons the premise that greater complexity cannot emerge from lesser complexity, the complexity theorem is shattered. Ultimately, we can safely argue that nothing less complex than the Universe could have created the Universe.
       If, on the other hand, we say that the Universe is too complex to have come about by chance, then we are implying that there is some particular level of complexity at which chance can no longer produce a given outcome; therefore, a Creator is required. If we say that the Universe is beyond that complexity threshold, then we must by necessity say that anything as complex as the Universe requires a Creator; by extension, we must also by necessity say that anything at least as complex as the Universe requires a Creator.
       But if the Creator of the Universe is as complex as or more complex than the Universe, then we can only reach the conclusion that that Creator, logically, is too complex to have come about by chance, and thus requires a Creator of its own. The argument that the Creator is eternal and always existed, and thus never "came about," cannot circumvent the problem; for if that Creator, with its incredible level of complexity, could have been eternal, then the Universe, which is less complex than the posited Creator, could just as easily have been eternal. Coupled with Thomas Aquinas' premise that "everything has a cause," we result in an infinite causal chain -- which Aquinas ironically refutes in another of his own premises in the same "proof" -- with each subsequently more-complex creator requiring its own creator, leading to an infinite number of increasingly complex creators that begins to look more like the Greek pantheon than anything from the Judeo-Christian doctrine.
       Clearly, the only rational conclusion to the complexity problem is that the first premise -- the assumption that the Universe is too complex to have come about by chance -- is incorrect. The logical explanation is that the Universe did come about by chance, and that no Creator exists.


Back