Alexander Vilenkin - Considering God's Existence?

Should believing in God be the product of one's own thinking? Should we avoid simply following the traditions or norms of the society or social group in which we were born? In assessing God's existence, what are the kinds of issues to address, problems to solve, questions to answer? What are diverse and optimal ways of considering God's existence?

[uremove]

I admire the honesty and open-mindedness in this interview. Dr K, by clever questioning seems to draw Prof. Vilenkin out from the attitude ‘there’s no evidence for a personal God’ and ‘we don’t need a extra concept of God for the Laws of Nature’ to ‘consciousness might involve something beyond physics’ and then ‘there could be a transcendent Platonic realm, where the laws of Physics originate’...

It’s very refreshing to hear a Physicist go beyond their comfort zone of naturalistic explanations to consider such questions as ‘where do the Laws of Physics exist’.

[jfvirey]

It's interesting that he starts by rejecting a *personal* God, and ends up wondering *who* did the choosing of the laws of physics.

[BobQuigley]

the best I can do is recognizing the mystery that is the universe which also is the mystery that is me...

[scrumpymanjack]

I’ve only just come across Prof. Vilenkin, and I don’t pretend to understand a lot of his work. But what a mind! Just unbelievable the intellectual level this guy operates on.

[obkeno]

START: "I don't believe in a personal god", END: "... and who did the choosing..." 😎

[aligaming]

He doesnt seem like he believes in God but the last bit near end "who did the choosing" .... he felt it.

[xtrofilm]

I really enjoyed that, thank you, good questions, interesting answers.

[papinbala]

this man is so underrated. Neil DE grass Tyson can only dream to have a brain like Vilenkin

[Td]

I just don't know why the god question is brought up so much knowing nobody can answer that and shouldn't matter at all to science

[naiotenipianomusic]

Is a theoretical physicist is qualified to give a scientific state of art on what we know about conciousness ? And make speculations on what/who it could originate from ?

[Beevreeter]

We cannot even agree on the simplest definition of "God" - so how can we even talk about it?

[JungleJargon]

Where did the energy come from? Energy can’t make itself and energy can’t direct or order itself. Energy is the evidence of God and is often referred to as gods or powers themselves. It’s just that they can’t make themselves so God can’t be limited to limited measurable time and distance. The cause of physical things can’t be physical.

[adrianmsullivan]

The question really shouldn't be whether God exists, but whether there is a personal entity who is acting on our behalf. Otherwise, the "God" question is so pointless that it really is not relevant to our lives. That is, even if people want to point to God as being a person, that does not mean that God is someone we can interact with. God may be so far away (e.g., like an extremely far away black hole) or uninterested (e.g., as in the deist conception of God) that it doesn't matter to our everyday lives. So, we must distinguish between God being a person and God being personal... More to the point, how can we actually know, rather than just strongly believe and fool ourselves into thinking we know, the specific ways that God is active in our lives or the world? This is especially true when so many people who believe contradict each other, and there is nothing objectively to confirm our suspicions. So, practically speaking, how is that situation (i.e., where God exists and is personal but we are not be able to tell) any different from the situation in which God exists but isn't personal, or the situation in which God doesn't exist at all? (Again, practically speaking.) From that perspective, is it any wonder that some people don't believe that God exists and that human attempts to prove God's existence may seem like rationalizations to support their faith (with all due respect)? As Evangelical Christian philosopher Dr. William Lane Craig himself has said: the arguments for God's existence are not the basis of his faith but serve to reinforce his faith.

[Jack__________]

Would “a squared” plus “b squared” equal “c squared” if we never wrote it down? Yes. The ratio existed and then humans discovered it. We only invented the symbols to relay the concept.

[welbeckdanquah]

Who did the choosing? Who made the options to be chosen from?
This mystery, so exciting and awe-inspiring

[adriancano]

When you have an NDE like me it changes your perception about Everything. I feel sorry for Scientist who puts God Aside as whatever.

[apeculiargentleman]

Too many scientists stumble at the very basics of philosphy and here's another.

[NlHILIST]

As regards the laws of physics somehow existing 'out there'... that can be a useful perspective, like numbers somehow existing out there for mathematical platonists. If it's helpful to see things that way, then why not? However, a moment's thought should suffice to see that the laws of physics are man made and are more correctly regarded as a network which we hold up to the 'out there' and which filters the 'out there' back to us in terms of the shapes of the meshes in the net.

[fred_]

"...there's some platonic world where the mathematical world of physics 'exist', even prior to the universe." That figures :)

[publiusovidius]

Like Einstein he dismisses the notion of a personal god who intervenes in human affairs. That's all that matters. That shuts down the Christians, the Muslims, and the Hindus. They're the ones who are desperate to believe there's a god who cares about them and listens to their prayers. All the abstract/deistic god talk doesn't matter.