David Hume (1711-1776) wrote: “I never asserted so absurd a proposition as that anything might arise without a cause”

On Capital Circle N.W. you may see a non-descript sign on the side of the road. It is simply a green star on a black square background, close to the ground, nothing else near. I often passed this sign and wondered what purpose it served. Signs do not arbitrarily appear so I began a quest to find its origin. After questioning several shop proprietors, the owner was found. He said it was easier to tell people to look for the green star than to look for his business sign among all the others.

A basic pattern of human thought is based on the principle of causality, which stated is, every effect must have a cause. Aristotle accepted this principle when trying to understand motion in the universe. He said for motion to exist there had to be an ultimate cause which started motion for all time. He called this ultimate cause an Unmoved Mover. Aristotle was not purporting a personal God but recognized all effects; including motion must have a cause. The atheist David Hume (1711-1776) wrote: “I never asserted so absurd a proposition as that anything might arise without a cause” (Hume, Letters, 1:187). Indeed, in the same source Hume claimed that it would be “absurd” to deny the principle of causality.

Another pattern of human thought is the principle of uniformity, which says we can know the past from the present. The faces on Mt. Rushmore are too specific to be done by natural causes so we assume an intelligent cause. Archeologists use the principle of uniformity when they assume an intelligent cause (civilization) from finds of pottery and tool artifacts. Forensic science (i.e. the TV show CSI) uses the principle of uniformity to explain murders. If a body is found with a gun shot to the head a natural cause of death is not assumed. We overlook this thinking pattern but if we were to find a piece of paper with writing on it we would assume an intelligent cause. Why? Because we are intelligent causes who write and we use and make pottery and tools. The sign I saw could not place itself or rise from the earth on its own, so my assuming an intelligent cause for the sign agrees with the principle of uniformity. Not only did I find an intelligent cause for the sign, I found a meaning.

The sign on the road had a reason for being there and I wanted to know its purpose. I applied the principles of causality and uniformity to investigate the reason, or the “why” for the sign. Causality and uniformity are universal principles and they are the principles on which all scientific inquiries are based. Science would be meaningless if nothing had a cause or a reason for being. Whatever our belief system, these principles are used in everyday life whether we understand them fully or not. Just like the archeologist, Christianity uses the principles of uniformity to assume an original intelligent Cause. Evolutionists break with these principles and assume human existence came from a naturalistic, non-intelligent cause. I see the theistic view as being more consistent with the pattern in which we think. A Supreme Intelligent Being is an adequate assumption to explain the cause of human existence. Christianity assumes there is a Cause and we are His purpose.

The atheist Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion, made this statement about “why” questions: “Why are we here? What is our purpose does not deserve an answer." Mr. Dawkins believes we can ask where the laws of physics come from but not ask their purpose because this “implies some kind of deliberate purpose giver or purpose thinker." According to Mr. Dawkins, a why question worth asking is, “Why, after some period of billions of years, did life originate on this planet and then start evolving?” Mr. Dawkins says we can ask why as long as we are not looking for purpose. The problem is without purpose there is no meaning. Mr. Dawkins just wants facts for facts sake. He wants to know why life originated on this planet but he cares not for the meaning. If there is no meaning why ask why

Humanities literature is filled with the question of why. The common motif of one climbing a hill to ask a guru type a question of meaning is just one example. Life itself is often paralleled with as a journey to meaning. In the movie “City Slickers” Billy Crystal, apparently going through a middle life crisis, wants to know the meaning of life. Man has always assumed two things. There is a cause and there is purpose. ? I find it fascinating an individual, like Mr. Dawkins can claim an a priori knowledge of no meaning to all that has ever been.