Friday, October 8, 2010

L 5.14

On the subject of the existence of the universe, Loftus says “the concept of inertia…does away with the need to explain motion as requiring either a regress of causes, or an unmoved mover”. (p. 83)

The concept of inertia itself isn’t explained by this assertion from Loftus. Why does inertia exist? How did it come into being? All Loftus did is push the ultimate question back further, or up higher, as the case may be.

Similarly, much has been made of Stephen Hawking's recent assertion that God is not needed to explain the universe. Physics can do the job just fine according to Hawking. However, Hawking fails to explain where the physical laws he refers to came from. John Lennox has a pointed response.

No comments: