(April 22, 2015 at 1:44 pm)Harris Wrote:(April 21, 2015 at 1:07 pm)Surgenator Wrote: The fifth way is Aquinus trying to sneak intelligence into natural laws. The natural laws are a byproduct of symmetries. For example, translation invariance (this spot over here is no different than that spot over there) -> conservation of momentum. No intelligence is required for the conservation laws to exist.
The concept of quantitative conservation laws, such as those of mass and energy, is of much later origin. Even prior to the development of modern mechanics, symmetries were employed to solve some dynamical problems. The relation between conserved quantities and symmetries has come to play a central role in the physical sciences. Conservation laws may reflect as much about the way the human mind organizes the phenomena of the world as they do about physical reality itself.
In fact, there are principles of lawfulness and of causality, which reflect basic and universal characteristics of human thought and understanding. This suggests that our various conservation laws may be rooted as much in the human mind as they are in any external reality.
Why would it matter when human beings discovered the relationship between symmetry and conservation? The direct-consequential relationship would still exist prior to humans discovering it. So Aquinas arguing that intelligence is required to explain these laws is him arguing from ignorance.
Also, Aquinas argues that physical laws are inherent to the reality itself. The admission that physical laws could be a byproduct of the human mind organization undermines Aquinas's argument further.
