Dmitry Chernikov’s Blog

1. The first argument for God’s existence is from “the first designing cause.” A is designed by B; B, by C; etc. There must then be a being which is undesigned but who is the author of nature. Now a designer is by definition intelligent. Since design is purposeful arrangement of parts, either (1) God’s parts hang together without a purpose or (2) God has no parts. But not (1), because no intelligence, especially such an impressive one that is responsible for the designs of all created things, will tolerate functionless structures within itself. It follows that God is simple. I have already discussed this argument by saying that God is “the world’s programmer or lawgiver.” For example, God has implanted the desire for natural happiness into humans, and it is for the sake of that (or of the penultimate end of their own perfection) that they exist.

2. At to God as the first efficient cause, here God actuates nature from within, as it were; it gives nature the ability to act according to its causal dispositions and wishes it bon voyage. God in His capacity as the FEC is present in all things as the innermost and most intimate cause of their being and essences. This means that God is the first being Who existed before all of nature. Since actuality is prior to potentiality absolutely, God must needs be pure act, and simplicity follows upon that.

3. A similar argument can be formulated for final causation. We see that in nature some things exist for the sake of others and are ordered to their benefit. Thus, plants exist for the sake of chickens, chickens are raised for the sake of their meat, e.g., to be eaten by cats, my cat exists for companionship with me, and I, too, must have a final cause of my sojourn here. However long this chain of causes is, it cannot be infinite and must terminate in something which is not willed into existence. And that is God. God is then a self-existing and necessary being at rest, something that grants purpose to all that exists and is Himself His own end and the act of unencumbered enjoyment of His self-possession. God’s simplicity can be deduced from this, because God’s end must be one: if multiple satisfactions competed equally for God’s attention, then their purposes would be derivative: they would serve God’s overall happiness. In other words, God loves the whole of Himself, such that the whole of Himself is the source of His delight, and that love unites God’s aspect as the lover with God’s aspect as the beloved into such a tight unity that God is one and simple.

However, just as before, any chain we actually investigate ends up with an ultimate given. Thus, to a naive eye humans seem to be the ultimate final causes of things: whatever exists, if it has a purpose, then it is a purpose that humans attach to it. It is not obvious that humans must themselves have a purpose, or if they do, e.g., to act as fertilizer for trees after they are dead, that it has anything to do with God. So, we must say instead that a purposeless universe is inconceivable; for example, nothing that lacks a final cause is noticeable to humans. If the universe has no final cause, then it is not seen and might as well not exist. But it does exist, and it is real. God must therefore love each and every thing in the world and will it to be.