[Serious] Thomism: Then & Now

[HappySkeptic]

I see this as an argument from ignorance.  Natural "law" is simply order, not something purposefully directed.  Order does not necessarily require intelligence.

Isn’t that what order is: being disposed towards a definite end?

Hell no.  There is no definite end.  The universe isn't deterministic.  If started identically 1000 times, it would evolve with subtle difference each time.

Order is simply a set of relationships.  If there is no order, there cannot be structure to existence, as complexity requires relationships to form.  With no relationships, there is no mathematics, no physics, no information, and no intelligence.

I would argue that without relationships, there is no way to even describe existence itself, or distinguish it from non-existence.

---

Movement happens even without cause - though symmetries in spacetime do result in conservation laws.  Conservation of energy allows the entire energy of the universe to be zero (negative gravitational energy, and positive mass-energy).

<emphasis mine> Just a reminder that movement, in this context, means “change”. So you are saying that changes happen for without causes, i.e. for no reason at all?

As far as we know, yes, specific quantum events are uncaused.  Their probability can be calculated from previous states, but probability implies setting up the same system many times and doing many measurements.  The individual case cannot be attributed to anything.

In our macroscopic world, the averaging of these probabilities usually lead to a high degree of predictive certainty, but individual random quantum events can have huge consequences (as in Shroedinger's cat).

We honestly don't understand causality.  We have statistical forward causality, but there appears to be a type of retro-causality as well, where there present causes us to re-interpret past history.  One way of looking at things is that all possible pasts have occurred, but that current measurements close off the timelines that don't correspond to our reality.  Another interpretation is that those timelines continue in some part of the multiverse (I hate Everett's many-worlds interpretation). 

So, when we talk about "efficient causes", I have no idea what they are at the quantum realm, and if we include things like time loops, or time forming during the big-bang, I have no idea how we even talk about contingency.  You say Aquinas doesn't talk about time?  Well, contingency is what defines time.