Natural Laws, and Causation.

[Angrboda]

I think you may be confusing two separate questions into one. The first is why is there (some) order rather than none? If there is any order at all, then that order will yield to description of law-like behavior. A universe with no order might simply be viewed as a specific position in the range of possible ordered universes. Given that we live in an ordered universe, the next question is, why this specific order rather than a different set of ordered conditions? One might suggest that, regardless of the specific order, we would be asking the same question. It's possible there are underlying reasons for the specific type of order, and science is investigating these possibilities; it's also possible that there is no reason, and asking the question in this way just shows an anthropocentric bias. I think to a large extent, metaphysics, including metaphysical interpretations of physical law, are attempts to paint a story of how things are "underneath" that gives rise to these behaviors. Unfortunately, I think metaphysics fails because it either ends up being a re-imagining of the familiar as explaining the unfamiliar, and so adds nothing, or ends up postulating things that are inconsistent, contradictory and nonsensical (you see this a lot in trying to imagine a consistent set of attributes for "God").

(ETA: The question arises, must there be a "bottom," a level at which there either are no underlying explanations for that level (which would create another level to get underneath), either because of the limits of science, practical limits, or because there is such a level where there is no lower level [see for example, Aristotle's primordial matter], or is it turtles all the way down? And how will we know at any particular stage which one of these it is? [The Germans are coming is a fan of Popper's critical rationalism; familiarizing yourself with the Wikipedia entry might prove useful])