In this second part we shall follow on from my previous article, taking a look at some of the scientific evidence that challenges the existence of a supernatural creator of this world or universe.
As we have seen from the introduction on Atheism, the challenge to the existence of gods has evidence stretching at least to classical Greek times, and the recognition of their being no gods can be traced to further, earlier Hindu texts. Again, in classical Greek texts, we begin to see evidence of an understanding of the true nature of the structure of matter, the world and the universe. This certainly did challenge the traditional Abrahamic view of creation. It was not until the Enlightenment that science truly began to challenge religion on the nature of the world but that was achieved of the back of the liberty generated by science-inspired philosophers, themselves challenging the right to heavenly authority in secular domains.
To keep things relatively simple (and short) we shall focus on a very few of the key challenges from the scientific community. It should be noted that these are not often the first proofs but arguably those having the greatest impact socially.
Copernicus‘ book “De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium”, released just before his death in 1543, defined and proved in mathematical terms the heliocentric nature of our solar system. This challenged the generally held view of the earth being the centre of the system and existence. Initially, although evidence suggests his work was widely read, it received no criticism from the Church until Tolosani condemned it in an appendix of his work. What propelled Copernicus’ work into the fore of heated religious condemnation was Galileo’s support of his theories, ahead of the Aristotilean view of the solar system which was supported by the Roman Catholic Church.
In 1687 Sir Issac Newton released his “Philosphiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica”. Newton was a polymath but was also a controversial religious figure and never saw his work as countering Christian religious views; yet his work was one of the causes of the Enlightenment, which itself lead to the erosion of church influence in society and the growth of secularism. The Principia confirmed Copernicus’ work and linked it with Keppler’s work on planetary laws, and Newton’s own work on gravitational law, confirming the heliocentric nature of the solar system. The Principia also helped accelerate the scientific revolution.
Charles Darwin’s “On The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection” established the theoretical basis for the mechanism of evolution to be viewed as the process by which the planet had become populated by such a wide and diverse selection of fauna and flora. Developed at a time when Christian states literally supported the Bible’s interpretation of how the world came to be made, the “Origin of Species” also implied that man had arrived at that point by the same process, and thus was not made in God’s image. This only garnered Darwin (and Wallace) vehement attacks from the church.
Science has seen a steady and almost constant turnover of theories and laws to explain the creation and processes of the planet, system, galaxies, universe and beyond. While none of the above scientific discoveries were directly formulated to challenge the existence of god, they have had two effects. The first is to question and erode church doctrine on how the planet and the solar system has worked. As this brought into question the validity of the Bible’s explanation of the world, this also then lead to the questioning of God’s involvement with the planet and even his existence.
Much of this was philosophical debate though and, aside from mathematical probability exercises, science hasn’t generally set out to prove or disprove the existence of God. Stephen Hawking‘s recent work however moves the debate from science/theological philosophy clearly into the scientific arena. Hawking’s claims that due to quantum uncertainty principles the universe could have started from nothing. As such there was no need for a higher being to kick start the creation of the universe and everything in it.
The last article in this series will be a small summary and a personal take on the previous two articles. Hopefully you will be able to use all three articles to create a debate for yourself and challenge your perceptions and beliefs.
