In brief
- Stephen Hawking (1942–2018) was an English theoretical physicist and cosmologist.
- He explicitly described himself as an atheist.
- He argued that the laws of physics can account for the universe without requiring a divine creator.
- When he used phrases such as “the mind of God,” he later explained that he intended them metaphorically.
Life and scientific work
Stephen Hawking was born in Oxford, England, on 8 January 1942. He became internationally known for research on black holes, cosmology and the origins of the universe, as well as for making difficult scientific ideas accessible to general readers. He served as director of research at the Centre for Theoretical Cosmology at the University of Cambridge.
Hawking died at his home in Cambridge, England, on 14 March 2018, aged 76. His family remembered both his scientific achievement and the persistence, wit and humanity that influenced readers around the world.
He lived for decades with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, commonly called ALS or motor neurone disease. The condition progressively affected his movement and speech, and he eventually communicated through assistive technology. His experience was unusual in its duration; individual cases of ALS vary, and general information about his life should not be treated as medical guidance.
Oxford, England
Cambridge, England
What Hawking meant by atheism
Hawking’s position was non-theistic: he did not believe that a personal deity created the universe or directed human destiny. In interviews and books, he maintained that scientific explanations do not need to add a supernatural cause where physical laws are sufficient.
The word atheist is used in more than one way. It can mean affirming that no gods exist, or more broadly, lacking belief in gods. Hawking’s later public comments were direct enough to place him within both common understandings: he identified as an atheist and regarded a deity as unnecessary to his cosmology.
“The mind of God” as metaphor
At the end of A Brief History of Time, Hawking used “the mind of God” as a literary image for a complete understanding of the universe. Some readers interpreted the phrase as evidence of religious belief. Hawking subsequently clarified that he meant knowing everything a deity would know if such a being existed—not professing belief in one.
This clarification matters because religious language can function metaphorically in popular science. Hawking sometimes used “God” as shorthand for the ultimate explanation or for the laws governing nature, while rejecting the concept of a personal being with whom humans could have a relationship.
The universe without a creator
In The Grand Design, written with Leonard Mlodinow, Hawking argued that physical law could allow a universe to arise without intervention by a creator. His reasoning drew on cosmology and the possibility of many universes, suggesting that conditions suitable for life need not be interpreted as evidence that Earth was deliberately designed for humanity.
That argument addresses whether a creator is required by a particular scientific model. It does not settle every philosophical or theological question about why laws exist, what meaning the universe has, or how people should live. Theists, atheists and agnostics continue to interpret the relationship between explanation and purpose differently.
Views on mortality and knowledge
Hawking compared the brain to a highly complex physical system and did not expect personal consciousness to continue after the body ceased functioning. He nevertheless described human life as valuable and expressed gratitude for the opportunity to understand the universe.
His public reflections consistently emphasized curiosity, adaptation and intellectual humility. He regarded human beings as a small part of a vast cosmos but considered our ability to investigate that cosmos remarkable. These ideas help explain why his atheism was paired not with indifference, but with wonder at nature and confidence in inquiry.
Why his views remain significant
Hawking’s cultural importance came partly from his ability to connect advanced cosmology with questions usually discussed in religion and philosophy. His conclusions were his own, not a consensus statement on behalf of science. Scientists hold a range of religious, agnostic and atheistic positions, while scientific methods themselves do not require a profession of belief or unbelief.
Reading Hawking carefully therefore involves separating three things: his scientific models, his philosophical interpretation of those models, and the metaphors he used to explain them to a broad audience.