Religion

Is the question of whether God (or a god) can be posited as the 'designer' of the universe related in any way to the question of whether we can know anything about an author from studying their books?

Comments

The problem with the analogy is that the existence of the author of a book is not in question. But whether the universe has an author is the question. On the assumption that the universe was designed, what we will or will not be able to tell about the designer on the basis of the design will depend upon just how much the designer betrayed of Him-Her-Itself in the design. If God did design the universe, but wanted us to be very confused about His-Her-Its nature, then we would not have much reason for thinking that the design would tell us much. So, to answer your question completely, we would have first to figure out exactly what we mean by "God" and whether a being of that sort would hide, deceive, or wish to remain mysterious. As for authors, it really depends upon the kinds of books they write, doesn't it? Isn't there a difference in authorial voices between genres (fiction, biography, technical writing, for examples)?

The two questions you name are often taken to be analogous. The analogy is structured something like a designing God is to the designed universe as an author is to the book she writes. Accordingly, the history of such thoughts contains phrases such as 'the author of our being' or 'the book of nature'. Of course, the analogy need not be with a book, it could be any act of making: blacksmiths, potters (because of the 'clay' in Genesis), and so forth. Such an analogy is generally considered quite weak, depending upon anthropomorphic identifications.

Your question, though, addresses a slightly different point. It is frequently argued by various literary theorists that the inference from a novel (say) to something about its author is invalid. Several schools of theorists make similar such points -- formalists, new critics, new historians, poststructuralists -- though for different reasons. It should be pointed out, however, that not all theorists of literature agree here. I doubt, for example, that there are many biographies of novelists that do not draw evidence from the novels.

Two common reasons for the inability to infer the author from the text are: first, that the author is not as 'in charge' of the writing process as it might appear. His or her subconscious, economic, linguistic or social environment, may have unnoticed (but extremely important) effects. Second, that the text comes to have value as a work of art for its 'internal' features, and that these are 'emergent' with respect to the intentions of the author. Third, that the interpretation of texts is a necessarily historical matter, and therefore the text we read today is not the same in relevant ways as that published a hundred years ago.

It seems to me that one would struggle to make any of the above arguments apply to the design of creation, although it might be interesting to try with the second.

In the reverse direction, the reasoning used to defend our ability to understand an author from his text, seems to apply still less if that is possible. It depends upon a commonality between the author and the reader (both are competent language users, who know what it means to have something in mind and express it, who are similarly embodied and belong to historically linked cultural environments, etc.), and these types of commonality are presumably entirely lacking in the case of divine design.

Read another response by Nicholas D. Smith, Douglas Burnham

Read another response about Religion