by Hamza Andreas Tzortzis (Islamic
Education and Research Academy)
PART I from III
One of the many common questions that
were asked during the Islamic Awareness Tour was “If God does exist what
reasons do we have to believe He is one?” This question is important as it
addresses a fundamental concept in Islamic theology, the concept of oneness.
The oneness of God, in Arabic tawhid, is a central theme in the Qur’an and a
message of all of the Prophets, the Qur’an eloquently describes the nature of
God and His oneness in the 112th chapter, “Say: He is God, the One. God the Eternal.
He begot no one nor was He begotten. No one is comparable to him.”
Before I begin to answer the question, it
is important to add that the concept of oneness in Islam is not limited to
God’s singularity and uniqueness. There are many aspects to this concept which
involve the way human beings should worship God, how they should understand His
lordship, and how they should understand God’s names and attributes. It doesn’t
stop there as these ideas transform an individual’s world view and outlook, as
a famous Asian-subcontinent thinker once wrote, “A believer in this…can never
be narrow in outlook. He believes in a God Who is the Creator of the heavens
and the earth, the Master of the East and the West and Sustainer of the entire
universe. After this belief he does not regard anything in the world as a
stranger to himself. He looks on everything in the universe as belonging to the
same Lord he himself belongs to. His sympathy, love and service are not
confined to any particular sphere or group. His vision is enlarged, his
intellectual horizon widens, and his outlook becomes as liberal and as
boundless as is the Kingdom of God. How can this width of vision and breadth of
mind be achieved by an atheist, a polytheist or one who believes in a deity
supposed to possess limited and defective powers like a man?”
In light of this there are many ways to
answer the question referring to God’s singularity and uniqueness, thereby
providing a positive case for the oneness of God, and they range from
theological to philosophical arguments. I will present the following 5
arguments:
1. Occam’s Razor
2. Logical Argument
3.Conceptual Differentiation
4. Uniqueness
5. Revelation
Occam’s Razor
The Qur’an rhetorically asks the question
“Did the universe come out of nothing?” The answer seems quite obvious due to
the metaphysical and undeniable logic that whatever begins to exist has a
cause, and since the universe began to exist, therefore it must have a cause.
It would be irrational to posit more than one cause for the universe, as an
infinite regress of causes is impossible. The reasons for this include the
absurdity of the actual infinite existing in reality; take the following
examples into consideration:
1. You have an infinite number of people
in a room, if I take two people away, how many do you have left? The answer is
infinity minus two. However does this make sense? If there are less than an
infinite number of people in a room you should be able to count that number in
the real world. But you can’t, in other words the infinite doesn’t make sense
in the real world. In light of this Mathematicians Kasman and Newman state “The
infinite certainly does not exist in the same sense that we say ‘There are fish
in the sea’”.
2. Imagine I am a soldier and I want to
shoot an enemy. In order for me to shoot I have to ask permission from the
soldier behind me to shoot, but he has also has to ask permission from the
soldier behind him to shoot, now imagine this continued forever, in other words
an infinite amount of time? Will I ever shoot the enemy? The answers is plain
obvious. In the same light an infinite regress of causes for the universe would
mean there would be no universe in existence in the first place.
So the conclusion that the universe has a
single independent uncaused cause seems quite plausible, however you can still
posit a plurality of causes all occurring at the same time. Is this a sound
argument? I believe it is not strong argument if we take Ockham’s Razor into
consideration. Ockham’s Razor is a philosophical principle attributed to the
14th century logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham. This principle
enjoins “Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate”, in English “Plurality
should not be posited without necessity.” In other words the simplest and most
comprehensive explanation is the best explanation.
Essentially it means that in absence of
any evidence or in absence of a need for a plurality of causes we should hold
onto the most comprehensive and simple explanation. In this case we have no
evidence to say the cause for the universe is actually a combination of two,
three or even one thousand causes so the simplest and most comprehensive
explanation is that this cause is one. Postulating a plurality of causes does
not add to the comprehensiveness of the argument. In other words to add more
causes would not enhance the argument’s explanatory power or scope. For
example, to claim that the universe was caused by an all powerful cause is just
as comprehensive than to claim to was caused by two all powerful causes.
Because one all powerful cause is all that is required, simply because it
is all powerful.
A contention to this argument is that if
we were to apply this principle to the pyramids in Egypt we would absurdly
adopt the view that it was made by one person. However, this is a
misapplication of the principle. Taking the view that the pyramids were built
by one person is actually not the simplest and most comprehensive explanation
as it raises far more questions than it answers. For instance, how can one man
build the pyramids? It is far more comprehensive to postulate that it was built
by many men. In light of this, someone can say that the universe is so complex
that it would be absurd to postulate that it was created by only one being.
This contention, although valid, is misplaced. A powerful being creating the
whole universe is a far more coherent and simple explanation than a plurality
of causes. Now the critic may continue and argue that the pyramids could then
have been built by an all powerful being. But the problem with this is that
nothing within the universe is an all powerful being, and since the
pyramids were built by an efficient cause (a person or persons that act) then
it follows it must be of the same type of cause.
(To be continued to PART II)
Source: http://www.hamzatzortzis.com
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar