There has always been an opposition between religion and science, despite the confession and the type of scientific data. The reasons behind this battle are understandable, as each of paradigms tries to explain the development of the universe differently. Each of the sides has its own arguments. A religious view is based on faith, while scientific point of view roots in theory, logic, and facts proved or disproved by experimental design. In his editorial “Science Increasingly Makes the Case for God” Eric Metaxas tries to argue that today scholars admit God’s authorship of the universe (Metaxas). In order to prove his point, Metaxas claims that the attempts of the SETI program (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) to find extraterrestrial life failed because, according to him, the universe was created by God. Also, the author implies that several scientists, like Paul Davies and John Lennox agreed with the assumption that there is a Creator (Metaxas). Moreover, he insists that the main proof of God’s design is the perfectionism he sees in the creation of the world (Metaxas). At the same time, the author makes several mistakes while trying to prove his point.
First of all, the tone of the article is clearly speculative, as there are no actual facts or empirical data to prove his assumptions. The main evidence of God’s existence presented by the author is a failure of astrophysicists to find aliens. Yet there is impossible to see any cause-and-effect relationship between these notions; inability to find extraterrestrial life does not prove that there is a God. Also, Metaxas uses the substitution of concepts by saying that scholars try to prove the creation of life was a coincidence. There are no respected scientists who implied that our existence was a coincidence and Metaxas does not provide any supporting evidence to his assumptions. Instead, the author simply adjusts the evidence he presents to his personal point of view, which in the scientific world is known as bias (Pannucci and Wilkins 620; Mitelman). In addition, the author provides the evidence that relies on new branches of science like SATI program that is the part of exploratory science framework (SATI Institute).
Further analysis of Metaxas’ article reveals that the author contradicts the Anthropic Principle, which is based on “the self-evident truth, that if the universe had not been suitable for life, we wouldn’t be asking why it is so finely adjusted” (Hawking 4). Stephen Hawking, who is a well-known and highly respected theoretical physicist, cautions against the type of assumptions made by Metaxas by claiming that as we live in this universe, “we should not be surprised that the physical constants are finely tuned” (Hawking 8). According to Hawking, if these physical constraints were not built accordingly, there would be no people (Hawking 8). Metaxas’ arguments are not supported by strong evidence, as the article presents the assumptions of a person who clearly is not familiar with all constraints presented by scientific thought and due to bias deliberately tries to find the proof of his beliefs.
Works Cited
Hawking, Stephen. A Brief History of Time. New York: Bantam Books, 1989.
Metaxas, Eric. “Science Increasingly Makes the Case for God”. The Wall Street Journal, 24 Dec. 2014. Web. 12 Feb. 2016.
Mitelman, Geoffrey A. “Sorry, Science Doesn't Make a Case for God. But That's OK.” Huffington Post, 29 Dec. 2014. Web. 12 Feb. 2016.
Pannucci, Christopher J. and Edwin G. Wilkins. “Identifying and Avoiding Bias in Research”. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 126.2 (2011): 619-625.
SETI Institute. “Our Work”. The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence. Web. 12 Feb. 2016.
