"The laws that explain the universe's birth are less comprehensive than Stephen Hawking suggests," suggests Paul Davies, asking "What is the source of those ingenious laws that enable a universe to pop into being from nothing?" — Stephen Hawking's big bang gaps.
"Hawking and his fellow-travelers want to attribute the beginning of the universe to physical laws, while ignoring the issue of their source," says Matthew Cullinan Hoffman — Stephen Hawking's Junk Science Atheism. "A law is a concept, a principle, it is not a physical thing," the reviewer notes. "How do such laws exist without a lawgiver? How do concepts exist without a mind to conceive them? If so, where and how do they exist? Are they floating around in the mythical ether?"
Labels: Philosophy, Religion, Science, Scientism