Why the Universe and human life must have purpose.

Why the Universe Must have a Purpose.

Rev Howard Taylor.

The well known atheist scientists Richard Dawkins and Peter Atkins never tire of telling us that the universe has no purpose and that the question `Why are we here?' is a silly question. (Incidentally there can be no result from the natural sciences that would lead us to their conclusion which is sheer prejudice under the guise of science.)

In a revealing passage at the beginning of `The Selfish Gene' Richard Dawkins says:

"I shall argue that a predominant quality to be expected in a successful gene is ruthless selfishness.... Be warned that if you wish, as I do, to build a society in which individuals co-operate generously and unselfishly towards a common good, you can expect little help from biological nature. Let us try to teach generosity and altruism, because we are born selfish." Perhaps Dawkins does not seem to realise that his desire that we be taught to be unselfish - against our biology - implies both that there is purpose to human existence and that something has gone wrong with our human being which should be countered by purposeful teaching.

However those who deny the validity of the `Why?' question have to say that the universe is in being and that is all there is to say. For them the only appropriate question to ask of nature is the `How' question. How do natural phenomena occur?

But is the `Why?' question so silly?

Surely there must be other questions that follow the `how?' question. The first one is surely the `what?' question. What brought the Big Bang into being? What lies behind (if not before) it? Even granted that the Big Bang is the beginning of time, this is still a very real, obvious and legitimate question to ask. However when we begin to think about it, the `what?' changes to `who?'. As the zoologist Richard Dawkins (another of TV's favourite militant atheists) says, any God who created the universe would have to be at least as wonderful as the greatest thing that exists in the Universe. Accepting this argument we can say that since personal beings exist, that which brought the universe into being cannot be less than personal. `What?' has to change to `who?'. Once we have begun to ask `who?' then the `why?' question of purpose naturally follows. Professor T. F. Torrance tells us that in 1929 Einstein said that science has now reached the stage where it cannot be satisfied simply with describing how nature is what it is in its ongoing processes, but must press on to ask "why nature is what it is and not something else".

At these very fundamental levels of enquiry when we have reached the boundary of the natural world, the questions `how do things behave as they do?' and `why do things behave as they do?' converge into the one question. Once we have accepted the validity of the `Why?' question we have admitted that there may be purpose to the existence of the universe. If nature and our lives might have purpose then it is beholden upon us to seek that purpose so that we can discover how we should behave in this world. The universe forces not only to consider what `is' the case but what `ought' to be the case and what ought to be our part in it.

The main article also considers other writers such as Stephen Hawking, Michael Polanyi, Bertrand Russell and Paul Davies. It also includes a meditation on Genesis 1.

Go to Main Article.

Back to
"Faith in the Modern World"