Theories of Everything as a hold over from monotheism?

Question

In his book "A Tear at the Edge of Creation", physicist Mario Gleiser argues that results from cosmology and particle physics make it unlikely that we will ever find an elegant unified theory of everything. He suggests that the current search for a Theory of Everything (TOE) and symmetry in the laws of physics by cosmologists, string theorists and other scientists is really just a hold over from monotheism. That even self identified atheist scientists, who are perfectly happy to abandon the notion of God, still cling to the notion of a single set of fundamental laws governing the universe due to the influence monotheism has had on western thought in general. I find the argument compelling, even if I don't agree with it (In fact his book has me doubting my own atheism and pondering deism). My questions are the following: - Has this point of view, that the search for TOEs and symmetry in the laws of physics is due to the influence of monontheism, been advanced by anyone else of note? - What would this point of view be called? Anti-reductionist atheism ? Extreme atheism? - (as a side question) Has anyone argued for a similar point of view, not from results in physics, but from Godel's incompleteness theorem? Edit: The original question used Grand Unification Theory (GUT) instead of Theory of Everything (TOE). I changed the wording per the first answer's comments and after going back to the book itself.

Answer 1

"Let there be Light" A belief in a Creator God is more logical. Otherwise, there are no real absolutes, but different opinions, or beliefs. Which brings in philosophies of all of life is an illusion or simulation, which essentially makes it pointless.

The Study of Physics, and Chemistry are essentially a description of how things work or function, based on mathematical principles, that can quantify things, again pointing to a Creator God who designed the universe to work that way. But, that cannot be proven as objective fact, because there is no videotape of the acts of early creation that one can look at. That crosses a barrier and makes it a belief based on faith, in that what man can observe is REAL, I think therefore I am.... And scientists can start with principles, even assumptions about that reality, that lay a foundation for describing, either with Physics, Chemistry, and Biology, how everything is ordered, makes sense, and from that how things function.