This week Stephen Hawking has declared that his latest work shows there was no creator of the universe. Our universe followed inevitably from the laws of nature. God is not needed as a variable in Hawkings equations.
So, what does that actually mean? Wretchard takes a closer look at this question and comes up with an answer that rather moderates Hawking’s extreme-scientist assertion.
The great majority of atheists and deists will have no clue to the mathematics or physics involved. Most of those who argue there is no love and meaning will stand on the great and prestigious academic credentials of Dr. Hawking, not upon their own logic. Those who reject it will doubtless quote other authorities. Very few will bother to notice that Hawking’s theory says nothing about meaning or love, other than that he does not need it in his equations.
Much of humanity has a great hunger for answers to questions to which Hawking does not concern himself. They will not be rigorously banished by claims they are illegitimate concerns or forbidden terms. Men will keep asking them and that is a sort of proof, by a sort of construction, that they have some existence.
In the process, Wretchard points out that Hawkings argument that the Laws of Physics are god, post-modernist philosophy must be rejected. Ending his stroll, he arrives at Pascal’s Wager. All in all some good stuff to mull over on this day.
Have a good Sunday.
[UPDATE001] On Pajamas Frank Tipler describes Hawking proving the existence of God, without wanting to.