In his upcoming book, “The Grand Design,” Hawking tackles the issue of God as a potential, or required, component of the universe. A CNN article notes that Hawking addresses some of the key arguments in Creationist or religious circles: “…he argues, any form of intelligent life that evolves anywhere will automatically find that it lives somewhere suitable for it.”
Regardless of his steps, many believers remain, and likely will continue to remain, unconvinced. According to the article, some of his colleagues say he might be correct about God being unnecessary for scientific principles, but that Hawking is wrong when it comes to the question of ‘why do we have anything at all?’ Fraser Watts, an Anglican priest and Cambridge ‘expert in the history of science’ rebuts the conclusions of the book:
“a creator God provides a reasonable and credible explanation of why there is a universe, and … it is somewhat more likely that there is a God than that there is not. That view is not undermined by what Hawking has said.“
Critics of Hawking claim that he is merely arguing against the ‘god of the gaps’ application. Director of the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion says:
“Science provides us with a wonderful narrative as to how [existence] may happen, but theology addresses the meaning of the narrative.”
Isn’t attempting to answer the question of why there is something, rather than nothing, with God, an extension of the ‘god of the gaps’ argument? Also, are humans incapable of otherwise creating meaning for themselves? Do human beings need meaning to be bestowed upon them by outside forces?
See also:
As a scientist I’m certain Stephen Hawking is wrong. You can’t explain the universe without God
God Not Needed To Create Universe, Hawking Says [NPR]
