Tuesday, 18 June 2013

Science, Religion, Hawkins and I

In a descending order. Yes, I dare to question all three. In fact I question myself more often than the first three—and as often with unsatisfying results.
Stephen Hawking and science are almost synonymous. I stand apart from both science and religion. The problem is that all of us perceive reality in a completely different way. Yet there are also narrow bridges where, sometimes, we can meet. For instant, Hawking states that:
 “We are so insignificant that I can’t believe the whole universe exists for our benefit.”
Of course. What Hawking fails to note is that we, you and I, and all intelligent beings, exist for the benefit of the universe. A subtle yet extremely important difference. Ultimately, if it weren’t for us, the universe wouldn’t exist.
Next is the problem of religion. Again, Hawking says:
“I’m not religious in the normal sense. I believe the universe is governed by the laws of science. The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not intervene to break the laws.”
Of course not. He/She/It would deny Him/Her/Itself, hence He/etc, would not exist. On the other hand, if we change the word ‘science’ for ‘god’, we immediately have a fully-fledged religion. Ergo, science and god are synonymous in Hawking’s mind.
And yet Hawking’s god, I mean science, is not reliable, or perhaps it is the religion that fails him. He states: “Any physical theory is always provisional, in the sense that it is only a hypothesis: you an never prove it…” I suppose one cannot really prove the existence of god either. We observe and admire what already happened… a while back. And this is precisely what science does. It observes what happened a while back. A billion years ago? Or at least a few milliseconds.
Back to god, er… to science.
Hawking: “The boundary condition of the universe is that it has no boundary.” Isn’t this how some of us think of god—as having no boundary? Of being infinite? Surely, even Spinoza would accept such a concept. In fact he did, I believe. That’s why the religious kicked him out. Hawking goes on: “The universe would be completely self-contained and not affected by anything outside itself. I would neither be created nor destroyed. I would just BE.”
Sound pretty divine to me.

And finally, at long last, Dr. Stephen and little moi come to total, unreserved agreement. When asked what does he (Hawking) think about most during the day, he replied, “Women. They are a complete mystery.”
Aren’t we, men, lucky? We can never get bored!

You’ll find another way of looking at almost anything in my novel, NOW—Being and Becoming. It denies neither Hawking nor religion, yet it offers something completely different. Just for you. 

To write a review on Amazon (or anywhere) of
while the offer stands

No comments:

Post a Comment