Proof of a non-naturalistic ‘rational agent’ via the conditions of intelligibility of the natural world and Stengerian physics

Stephen Ames (University of Melbourne)

Using the work of the physicist and astronomer Prof. Victor J. Stenger (Emeritus professor, University of Hawaii) – who counts himself among the new atheists, this paper argues from physics to final causes.  The paper has three parts: the physics, the move from physics to metaphysics, and the metaphysics.   The physics is Stengers’ derivations of the great laws of physics from the principle of point-of-view-invariance. These derivations are represented as the result R1, which appears to be ‘odd’ calling for explanation. In response it is first assumed that R1 can be explained within the resources of the natural sciences and so is not ‘odd’.  It is then shown that logically R1 cannot succeed and that without recourse to the principle of sufficient reason, it is unreasonable to treat R1 as a brute fact. This justifies seeking an explanation beyond the resources of the natural sciences. It is shown that the minimum needed to explain R1 is that the universe is structured by a ‘rational agent’ according to the laws of physics in order that the universe be knowable by empirical inquiry.  

Key Words:   point-of-view-invariance, laws of physics, final causes, rational agent.