William Craig Lane is a respected scientist and theist. He has won many accolades in the field of cosmology and philosophy, and most of his life’s work has been designed to create an understanding between the science of cosmology and the philosophy of nature. Sean Caroll on the other hand is a staunch physicist. He has made ground breaking assertions in the field of astrophysics and has some interesting ideas about cosmology and the beginning of the universe. The two were engaged in debate titled ‘ God and Cosmology’ where Sean Caroll opposed and William Craig Lane proposed the notion that cosmological evidence points to the existence of theism. Thus, it is essential to give a brief review of the debate along with the author’s individual thoughts on the assertions presented by the two debaters.
William Craig Lane poses some very interesting assertions concerning the debate between cosmology and theism. From my observation of the debate, I depicted that William Craig Lane was alluding to the fact that theism is valid out of the fact that the universe has a finite beginning (Lane & Caroll, 2014). This is an interesting proposition by William Craig Lane, and I have to admit that it caught my attention. Through the use of evidence from the expansion of the universe and quantum theory, William Craig Lane justifies that there is plenty of evidence in the current scientific arena that accepts that the universe has a finite beginning (Lane & Caroll, 2014). This assertion is not only made in isolation since there is a barrage of evidence from empirical studies that William Craig Lane invokes.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
From watching William Craig Lane, I have deciphered that he firmly believed that the more people engage in research to try to prove the inexistence of theism, the more they actually prove that theism is a real existence. This assertion was supported by William Craig Lane by alluding to the large number of failed theories that have tried to question the original belief of theism (Lane & Caroll, 2014). William Craig Lane, therefore, implies that the fact that science accepts that there was a finite beginning to the universe leans more in defence of the fact that theism is real (Lane & Caroll, 2014). I tend to support William Craig Lane’s claim since in essence, if there is overwhelming scientific evidence in support of a finite beginning, there is great probability that there was a superior being at the heart of it. On the other hand, I am also equally sceptical about William Craig Lane’s theories and assertions. The fact that there was a beginning does not necessarily mean that there was a superior being pulling the strings at the start.
However, I find William Craig Lane’s defence of theism to be spirited and well informed. By basing his argument on the Kalam Cosmological Argument and the Teleological argument, William Craig Lane has managed to completely argue that the universe has a finite start time, and also that the happenings in the universe are by design (Lane & Caroll, 2014). This argument strongly supports the ideology of theism since if in essence the universe began at a specific finite moment and all the activities happening within it are by design, then there is a great chance that there is actually a superior power on the periphery of effects actualizing all these things (Lane & Caroll, 2014). My thought on this assertion is that it is plausible that there is a supernatural being intervening in the affairs of the universe but then, there is also the possibility that the universe’s finite nature and design orientation can be explained through thermodynamics and other scientific propositions and theories.
Sean Caroll’s part in the debate was to oppose the fact that Cosmology supports the existence of theism. Sean Caroll starts impressively by outlining that the premise of the Kalam Cosmological Argument used by William Craig Lane is false (Lane & Caroll, 2014). Sean Caroll is convinced that the Kalam Cosmological argument is false based on the fact that it proposes that the universe exits because of a transcendent cause. Sean Caroll bases his argument on the fact that in modern physics, nature has been found to follow specific patterns (Lane & Caroll, 2014). Sean Caroll’s argument strongly disputes that anything in physics exists because of a transcendent cause because, according to his belief of physics, the activities in nature are structured by a great complex structure that has been formed via patterns that follow and obey models and laws. I find Sean Caroll’s argument to be fascinating because of the fact that it is actually true that physics explains nature through the use of patterns, laws, equations and models.
Sean Caroll impressively disposes the idea of looking for external causes to justify the existence of the universe by alluding to the model developed by Steve Hawkins about the universe’s existence. Sean Caroll’s idea is that since there is already an existing self-sufficient scientific model that uses mathematical connotations to explain observations concerning the existence of the universe, there is little need to allude to external causes (Lane & Caroll, 2014). Sean Caroll outlines that the desire to allude to external causes is extremely pre-scientific. He adds that with the existence of scientific model, there ought to be some level of satisfaction as opposed to constant attempts to point to a transcendent cause (Lane & Caroll, 2014). My thought on Sean Caroll’s assertions is that there is a possibility that the origin of the universe can be scientifically explained. Caroll’s assertions are insightful and educating but they have also equally failed to dispel the existence of a ‘God’.
In conclusion, both William Craig Lane and Sean Caroll pose interesting assertions and ideas on the concepts of theism and cosmology. In as much as both are well versed in their fields and both quoted from an insurmountable bulk of sources, it is crystal clear that both of them left a plausible feel in their assertions with none being able to dispel the other’s opinions and ideas about theism and cosmology with absolute certainty. This points out to the existing gap in the subject areas and as much as there have been steps towards finding answers to what remain the two most baffling areas of our existence, there is still a lot to be discovered and there is surely going to be a lot of twists before any conclusion is arrived at on the matter. I believe that both parties had solid arguments that were well informed and that each of them did their best to use the available evidence to argue their side of the debate topic. In hindsight, I am convinced that they both showed significant desire to acquire more knowledge on the areas under discussion and this was a good thing for the debate as it offered a significant learning experience for the audience.
References
Lane, W. C., & Caroll, S. (2014). Debate on Theism and Cosmology. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0qKZqPy9T8
