RE: Isn't the fine tuning argument ad hoc?
July 26, 2013 at 10:15 am
(This post was last modified: July 26, 2013 at 10:16 am by Anomalocaris.)
(July 26, 2013 at 9:55 am)MindForgedManacle Wrote:(July 26, 2013 at 9:21 am)genkaus Wrote: For example, suppose you are presented a pack of cards and happen to draw an ace. The question before you is if your draw was an intentional even orchestrated by another entity or it occurred without any intelligence behind it. Here the drawing of an ace is comparable to existence of our universe.
One answer would be that you can draw many cards and that they'd be different all the time and the one you drew this time just happened to be an ace. This would be the multiverse hypothesis.
Another answer would be that the person holding the pack specifically orchestrated things so that you'd end up drawing an ace. This would be the god hypothesis.
Which one seems simpler to you?
The first. But the comparison isn't quite right. For the multiverse hypothesis, you posit innumerable other universes to explain the permission of life in our own, while with the deck of cards it's considerably more limited with respect to transgressing Occam's Razor. Am I missing something?
But my point is that it has to be admitted that it does fall afoul of Occam, not that it doesn't explain the fine-tuning.
It does not run afoul occum's razor if the competing theories are either unsound or invalid, or in fact are no less complex, or have undefinable implicit complexity, while only appearing to be less complex.
