God, the Multiverse, Stephen Hawking, and You

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. Intelligent Observer says:

    All “proofs” of this sort suffer from the same fundamental weekness. How much fine tuning does it take for a God to exist?

    • Rafi says:

      I never claimed to prove anything, and I admit there are ambiguities in the fine-tuning argument. Hawking was my starting point in this article, and Hawking agrees that fine-tuning is “startling” and requires an explanation.

      In general, if you want to assume that God doesn't exist, then Kant demonstrated that no speculative proof can show you that He does. But if you assume that He does exist, then the elegance of the laws of physics is an inspiring display of His wisdom. Einstein called it “the grandeur of reason incarnate in existence, and which, in its profoundest depths, is inaccessible to man.”

      Anyway, as R. Berkovits writes in God, Man, and History, in the section I quoted, religion shouldn't care for proofs. Religion is about relationship.

      Thanks for reading and commenting.

  2. Flame18 says:

    science does not make philosphy irrelevant. science may be able to explain the world with out using god as an explanation. that says nothing about gods existence. science doesn't deal with abstracts, philosophy does. philosophy deals with abstracts such as scientific method, which science uses but doesn't create, ethics, definitions, free will, mind, belief, time- beyond what science says about it. Also notice that stephan hawking is arguing with philosophers and saying something philosophical. when science does talk about abstracts, it is being philosophical. philosophy is part of and includes every subject that humans think about.

  3. page says:

    670240 558895I ought to appear into this and it would be a difficult job to go more than this completely here. 174431

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *