Why?

At college one of the most popular classes was anthropology. The professor really made the subject live for his students.  The final was a single question on the chalkboard, and the students would have three hours to fill their bluebooks. One semester, he wrote "Why?" on the board, and left the auditorium.

Everyone began frantically scribbling away, except for one student, who considered the question for five minutes, wrote "Because" in his bluebook, and turned it in.

He got a "C."

Stephen Hawking, in "The Grand Design," seeks to answer the question, "Why does the universe exist?" He states that the universe created itself from nothing using gravity and a process called "spontaneous creation."

Even if Hawking is right, he has told us how the universe came to be, not why. Science, as powerful and useful as it is, explores the realms of what, when, where and how. It cannot answer the question, "Why?"  By its own rules, science can only deal with the physical universe, and leaves untouched so much of the reality that we experience as humans.

Richard Dawkins, the tireless atheist spokesman and biologist, is certain that the process of evolution tells us all that we need to know about life and human existence. However, even a complete understanding of evolution will not provide the answer to the essential and meaningful question of "Why am I here?"

Philosophy and theology, embattled as they are in this materialistic age, are the disciplines that attempt to deal with the "Why?" question. Science is restricted knowledge. Philosophy and theology attempt to expand on that knowledge with wisdom.

Science answers the question "Why?" with "Because." I would give Hawking a "D."

With a Perspective, I'm Nick Scales.