Stephen Hawking, astro-physicist extraordinare, said in a recent article that "It is not necessary to invoke God to ... set the Universe going." In other words the concept of God is not necessary for explaining the existence of the universe.
The media, naturally, is now distorting this statement to support the view that God doesn't exist. But really there is quite a difference between saying God isn't necessary, and saying God isn't.
Logic gives specific meaning to the words "necessary" and and "sufficient" when it comes to scientific testing of theories.
Belief in fiat creation by God IS sufficient to explain the universe, but NOT necessary to it. A Grand Unified Theory of Everything (which cosmologists and physicists seek like the Holy Grail) IS necessary to explain the universe scientifically, but ultimately NOT sufficient to it, because it cannot answer metaphysical questions. There are many things about human nature and spirituality that it does not explain.
Finally, Stephen Hawking is neither necessary nor sufficient for my understanding of the universe. Sorry, Dr. Hawking. Nice try, though.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment