It occurred to me the other day that more can and ought to be said about contemporary issues with gravitational (physical) cosmology, especially as this is the source of so much dubious triumphalism from so many physicists. As usual, I want to preface my comments with some explicit remarks about terminology. The word “cosmology” covers a number of topics, not all of them entirely overlapping. So in specifying gravitational cosmology, I am specifically pointing out that branch of astrophysics that deals with the large scale structures of the physical universe. There are also those areas of inquiry that can be qualified as philosophical cosmology and theological cosmology. An example of the former would be Whitehead’s work in Process and Reality (PR) dealing with what he called “cosmic epochs” as these are informed by his work in natural philosophy as found in his triptych (Enquiry into the Principled of Natural Knowledge (PNK), The Concept of Nature (CN), and The Principle of Relativity (R).) As one might well expect, theological cosmology deals with cosmological principles with a focus on god(s) and creation. (Examples here would include medieval arguments for the existence of god(s) from design, etc.)

The philosophical and theological approaches can and often do overlap. There is less room for such overlap with gravitational cosmology, because the latter is focused upon scientific – and hence, in some respect or other – broadly constructive and falsifiable principles. Philosophical cosmology can overlap with gravitational when (as is the case with Whitehead’s work) there is a fundamental challenge to the theory of nature that is being employed on the physical side. In such a case, questions arise as to the very nature of the above two qualifiers, “constructive” and “falsifiable.” I am less inclined to see any real overlap with the theological approach, however. When that appears to occur (almost, if not simply, exclusively at the insistence of the theologians), what is really happening (I would argue) is that the theologians are folding physical ideas into their theological arguments, and offering nothing in return to the physicists.