Science test God?
by Francois Yves
Salvatore, 186 pages, 18 euros
Without saying it explicitly, this little book responds to Michel-Yves Bollorie and Olivier Bonacis who both made their last work. God and science are evidence (Guy Tridaniel, 2021, 577 pages, 24 euros), it caused problems for some, and false hopes for others. The book in question seeks to present ” Proofs of God’s Existence, Modern, Clear, Rational, Interdisciplinary, Objective to Confront the Universe pThe “. Impressive subject, 100,000 copies sold with great marketing support… Proof of it.
This is what François Effie, a Jesuit and a physicist, responded to “It’s more complicated than it seems.” Far from positive – moreover, the title of his article is punctuated with a question mark – the author who is also the editor-in-chief of the magazine studiesask questions about “God’s presence”before decoding “Theories (scholars) the new “. Then he wonders if “Science and Faith Can Dialogue”. Believing: “I don’t think mixing species is good for both parties. Whether science asks more fundamental questions than was thought a century ago is one thing, whether it demonstrates the existence of God or the importance of religion is another.” It says in the preamble.
No evidence, only signs
François Yvy recalls this, by taking up the temporal evolution of the meditation on the existence of God “If there are not—and cannot in principle exist—formal and definitive ‘proofs’ of the existence of God, one can nonetheless find evidence of his existence.” A reflection obviously passing through Thomas Aquinas, to whom “There is, then, an intelligent being by whom all natural things are arranged to their end, and this being is what we call God.”
In parallel with theological progress, science is gradually unfolding, clashing with the same mysteries. Thus, in turn, Voltaire would emphasize it poetically: “The universe embarrasses me and I cannot imagine that this watch exists and does not have a watchmaker.” The author then evokes the successive and complex theories of scientific progress that confront two main questions: the origin of the world and God’s “miraculous” intervention in the course of human things. He went, “We can’t see the beginning of the universe, we just extrapolate it from what we know. The closer you get to it, the harder it is to get there.”. The Jesuit author refers to a guardianship figure: “The intellectual rigor of Albert Einstein did not prevent him from being disturbed by the mystery of the world.”
Two times for dialogue
What is undoubtedly important lies in this two-dimensional dialogue that bears their eyes on the world as it is: The emergence of an independent science does not jeopardize the recognition of God the Creator, François Effie continues. Each domain has its validity space, which should not be exceeded. But, on the contrary, it would be a shame not to take advantage of the plurality of approaches to the scientist, scientific, philosophical, theological and poetic. »
A cautionary text, ending with an interview between author and physicist Etienne Klein, the latter still insists: “To claim that God exists scientifically would also be naive for science itself. (…) This means that she would have completed her entire construction so much that she was able to identify all the questions before us, including non-scientific ones. »
