The cosmogonical question is not exact, and for this reason it surpasses the attacks on its validity from the direction of philosophy and from the direction of science.
The question is basically, "Why?". It lies on a threshold between a question of pain and a question of structure. On the one hand, "Why is something wrong? It is apparent that something is inherently wrong. Why is that?". On the other hand, "Why are there the symbolic, the imaginary and the real?"
This second question simply will not go away, at least not yet, as far as I can tell. It is literally a question about the genesis of the world insofar as the world is a 'physical' flux of contingencies knotted together with mathematical laws as well as affects and perceptions. Scientific cosmology does not begin to answer the question, "Why is there mathematics? And why do we understand it? And why does it describe the world that we sense?".
It is fair to take as axiomatic, or at least as a postulate, that mathematics, reality and affect are three different "wings" of the world. Mathematics yields new, unprecedented, astonishing synthetic truths. These truths end up explaining regularities in reality, but they don't constitute these regularities. Reality offers something more, a greater measure of contingency, a facticity of causal chains that do not have a mathematical explanation. The mind that experiences, suffers and learns, that receives and overcomes, is something different as well. THE THREE WINGS differ but are knotted together. Why? And why is something wrong?