宏大設計抑或是巨大迷思: 霍金的科學能解釋一切嗎?

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Abstract

霍金(Stephen Hawking)是著名的理論物理學家,他對黑洞的研究尤其出色。2010年,他與另一位科學家曼羅迪諾(Leonard Mlodinow)出版了《大設計》(The Grand Design),不單介紹最新的科學發展,還力陳科學能完滿解答最終極的存在問題,所以「我們不需要上帝」。本文會對此宣稱作出探討,我會論證霍金的觀點不能推翻宗教,首先是因為他對創造論有不少誤解,基督教創造論與霍金的理論基本上存在於不同層次,不一定矛盾。然而從理性和科學角度看,霍金的思想也不是無懈可擊的。他的無邊界宇宙論和他對量子力學的多世界詮釋,都存在巨大爭論,且沒有確實證據支持。霍金偏向科學決定論,而否定自由意志,也主要建基於科學主義,而不是科學本身。霍金認為科學能解釋一切,這也墮進了科學還原論的陷阱。霍金提出三個我們需要解答的存有的問題,我同意這點,但我論證他的思想並不能圓滿解答這些問題,反而有神論能提供更好的答案。

Stephen Hawking is a famous scientist in the area of theoretical physics, especially theories about black holes. In 2010, Hawking & Leonard Mlodinow published the book The Grand Design to introduce some recent scientific developments. It also claims that science can satisfactorily answer the ultimate questions about existence, and hence we do not need God. In this paper, I will examine this claim, and argue that Hawking's view cannot overturn religion. Firstly, he has some misunderstandings about the Christian doctrine of creation. Since the doctrine of creation and Hawking's view in fact exist on different levels, they do not necessarily conflict with one another. Secondly, from the perspectives of reason and science, Hawking's view is far from impeccable. His cosmology with no boundary and his many world interpretation of quantum mechanics are both extremely controversial and lack substantial evidential support. Hawking inclines towards scientific determinism and denies the reality of free will. These are in fact based on scientism and not science itself. Hawking thinks that science can explain everything but this has fallen into the trap of reductionism. Hawking suggests, rightly, that we need to answer three questions about existence. However, I argue that his own view cannot satisfactorily answer these questions, but theism in fact can provide better answers.
Original languageChinese (Traditional)
Pages (from-to)133-172
Number of pages40
Journal建道學刊
Issue number55
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2021

Cite this