In 2019, Templeton Prize winner Marco Gleiser made waves when he said that “atheism is inconsistent with the scientific method.” In his view, atheism is a “categorical statement of belief,” and doesn’t depend on evidence as much as assumptions.
This, of course, clashes with claims of the so-called “New Atheism,” that science has officially debunked God as an explanation for the universe.
Gleiser is an agnostic, and thinks scientists shouldn’t close off the possibility of God.
This accomplished scientist is saying something very important: atheism is not science’s default position.
On the other hand, it’s important to note that science is not completely silent on the God question either, which is why generations of scientists have been drawn to a belief in the Creator precisely because of what they noticed in the universe they were observing.
To put it another way, atheism isn’t inconsistent with the scientific method just because it’s a “categorial belief,” but because it denies the order, complexity, and intentionality that point to God-centered conclusions.
BreakPoint