Saturday, February 04, 2012

6/18/10, Opinion Editorial, Finger Lakes Times

Consciousness Is The Proof

By: Sardar Anees Ahmad

Can anything exist without God existing? Since eternity, it seems, man has debated this question. The argument below, largely adapted from Mirza Tahir Ahmad’s works, argues that nothing can exist if God does not.

Consider that, regardless of one’s beliefs, ‘eternity’ is a reality. One may disagree about eternity’s nature, but never its existence – even if one believes that ‘nothingness’ eternally existed. In this debate, therefore, either the universe or God is eternal. If, as atheists argue, the universe is eternal, then ‘consciousness’ is not eternal because consciousness evolved from something (or nothing) that was unconscious. If, however, consciousness is required for the universe’s existence, then consciousness is eternal and precedes everything. No question about what produced consciousness arises because the Conscious Force is itself eternal. As an example, consider looking at two rooms – one organized, the other disorganized. One would conclude a conscious organizer visited the first room, but not the second.

Now, if something is eternal it possesses the means for self-sustenance. But no material existence – conscious or unconscious – possesses this quality. This presents a dilemma for atheists. The principle of entropy states that the universe has a finite level of energy, and small portions of that energy are constantly being lost. If, as atheists argue, the universe is eternal, then energy would have fizzled out infinitely long ago, leaving no chance for matter to coalesce and develop. The combining of random matter into an end product requires energy, which, if it must not fizzle out, requires a Conscious Force. Thus, if the atheist’s view of the universe is correct the reader should not be reading these words.

But do we see a Conscious Force affecting the universe? Take the creation of DNA and RNA, which are amongst the most basic elements of life and are instrumental in creating proteins. From ‘nothingness’ to DNA and RNA’s creation, a massive evolutionary step is required that requires a Conscious Force to guide its development. Frank Allen, Manitoba University biophysics professor, notes that for a single unconscious protein molecule to form on its own requires 10248 years. Compare this with our universe which has only existed for ~14 billion years. Therefore, natural selection, or any similar mechanism, cannot alone account for the creation of even the basic elements of life. The Qur’an (7:196) states, “Have they feet wherewith they walk, or have they hands wherewith they hold, or have they eyes wherewith they see, or have they ears wherewith they hear? Say, ‘Call upon the partners you associate with God, then contrive ye all against Me, and give Me no time”.

Note, while similarities exist, this argument is not Thomas Aquinas’ “Cause of Causes” argument. Aquinas famously argued that since every action requires a cause, an Ultimate Cause must exist. The argument, as Richard Dawkins argues, relies on the idea of “regress”. For example, for water to exist, hydrogen and oxygen must exist. For hydrogen and oxygen to exist, atoms need to exist, and so on. Dawkins notes that Aquinas unjustifiably assumed that God is immune from that same regress. In contrast to Aquinas’ argument, the focus here is consciousness, not creation. Aquinas also references “argument by design” – i.e. a wristwatch cannot exist without a conscious watchmaker. However, Aquinas applies the principle to objects, not eternity. If applied to objects alone, natural selection rebuts Aquinas’ assumption.

Ultimately, the very thing that makes humans who we are – our consciousness – lends support to the need for God’s existence.

Comments (3)

This is no proof and is actually quite weak. It is a decent attempt, but unconvincing. You have not proved that a consciousness exists for each and every individual and you have not proved the existence of your own consciousness. At best, giving you the benefit of the doubt, this argument proves the existence of your personal God. It is also not at all necessary that the energy in the universe would have fizzled out if the universe is eternal. Perhaps that is possible, but no one knows and will probably never know exactly how much energy the universe would have had at any point in time not to mention the rate at which it was used.

To prove there is a God requires a significant amount of assumptions. Unfortunately, reason will never be sufficient to prove God's existence. It is meaningless to try as faith is the key. Faith and reason are tiers in the ladder of life, you begin with reason and end with faith (if Allah guides you). When used together correctly it is a beautiful thing, but fragile all the same. This is also from our respected khulafa. Thank you...
Aasim - June 23
@ Aasim - You underestimate the laws of entropy. If in fact the universe were here for an infinite amount of time, there is no possibility that anything would be left due to the dissipation of energy via entropy. The laws of physics are clear that mattery/energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only converted back and forth. We also know there is a limited amount of matter/energy in the universe, and have even determined an approximate starting point for the universe, roughly 13 billion years ago. So your assertion is not correct, scientists do know how much energy the universe roughly holds at this point. The term when the Universe will ultimately collapse on itself is called "heat death." i.e. when the laws of entropy take to fruition and there is not enough energy left to hold the universe together.

The consciousness argument is actually very well done. Consider the basis. Order cannot come out of disorder. It is impossible. Something cannot appear out of nothing. You will not see a city build itself. There's a million analogies I can give here but hopefully you understand the principle. On the other side, whenever an orderly thing does come to creation, it is created by an intelligent being. An automobile is made by an engineer. A steak dinner is made by a cook. Intelligence, consciousness, created an object. Ultimately, Whoever or Whatever created the first bit of energy/matter, absolutely must have been a Conscious Being. To deny that is to deny the very laws of physics on which our universe functions.

Also, while faith is required ultimately, Islam is the only religion that offers certainty of logic and science to support that faith. There is no contradiction between the Word of God and the Work of God in Islam.
Qasim - June 23
An article in today's Huffington Post talks about this very subject: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...21261.html

A pertinent quote from the article:

The British physicist Paul Davies is also astounded by the sheer unlikelihood of human life, and he suggests that something else might have been going on to tip things in our favor: "The origin of life on Earth ... could well have been the result of a stupendous chemical fluke. [However,] ... computing the raw odds quickly shows that even the simplest known cell is so unlikely to form by accident it wouldn't happen twice in the entire observable universe. Or in a trillion similar universes ... Perhaps life's origin wasn't a freak event after all, but the automatic outcome of inherently bio-friendly laws of nature." (2)

I suggest that we all study Paul Davies book because he uses science itself to say that physics alone cannot explain everything. If anything the laws of physics (entropy particularly) seem to suggest that we shouldn't exist at all!

In true Khalifae Rabbae fashion, I will leave you with a joke:

One day a group of scientists got together and decided that man had come a long way and no longer needed God. So they picked one scientist to go and tell Him that they were done with Him.

The scientist walked up to God and said, "God, we've decided that we no longer need you. We're to the point that we can clone people and do many miraculous things, so why don't you just go on and get lost."

God listened very patiently and kindly to the man and after the scientist was done talking, God said, "Very well, how about this, let's say we have a man making contest." To which the scientist replied, "OK, great!"

But God added, "Now, we're going to do this just like I did back in the old days with Adam."

The scientist said, "Sure, no problem" and bent down and grabbed himself a handful of dirt.

God just looked at him and said, "No, no, no. You go get your own dirt!"


Salman - June 23

Write comment


busy