RE: Theists: What is the most compelling argument you have heard for Atheism?
March 30, 2017 at 10:14 am
(March 30, 2017 at 9:57 am)SteveII Wrote:(March 30, 2017 at 9:14 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: What is not a fact is that the universal constants could have been different. You have only arbitrarily asserted physical necessity is not the reason for the fine-tuning of the universe, not ruled it out by any rational process. I'm sure there's a Nobel waiting for the person who can do that.
Not to mention that there's no mechanism for universe generation that would not just keep spewing them out, so there's no way to rule out chance from near infinite opportunities, either.
2. fails spectacularly.
For the love of reason, you can't be this dense. You haven't given a reason why design is more probable than necessity or chance. Without that, it's 2 to one against.
First, you have obviously not read back through the posts for the past 9 pages.
Yes, the initial constants could have been different. There is nothing that makes them the way they are. That is not debated. Therefore, the universe is NOT the way it is out of necessity.
I think this also brings up an interesting question from a teleological perspective. Are the laws of physics emergent (properties of matter itself) or are they governed by something greater and existing before the matter of the universe was formed? To put it another way; does the material conform to the laws of physics, or is physics based on the material?