RE: Isn't the fine tuning argument ad hoc?
July 26, 2013 at 10:22 am
(This post was last modified: July 26, 2013 at 10:29 am by MindForgedManacle.)
(July 26, 2013 at 9:48 am)Chuck Wrote: Really?? Just how simple do you think a god that did all those things could be? And just because you labelled such a enormous pile of bullshit with just three letters you think it is therefore only a simple little lie?
It would have to be, by necessity, simpler than the multiverse hypothesis, which posits an infinite (or at least innumerable) set of other universes.
(July 26, 2013 at 9:48 am)max-greece Wrote: I don't agree. God would have to be infinitely more complex than the sum of the universes in a multi-verse.
WHAT? God is LESS parsimonious than an infinite number of universes? -_- Come on.
Quote:If the process that produced the universe can be repeated (with or without variation) then the number of times it might have occurred doesn't really increase the complexity.
It's not about complexity, it's about transgressing Occam's Razor, in this case to a potentially infinite degree.
(July 26, 2013 at 10:15 am)Chuck Wrote: 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.
It's not about complexity, but about redundancy. There's no escaping that an infinite number of universes is far less parsimonious than practically any other explanation. That doesn't make it wrong (Occam's Razor doesn't determime truth, it's just a useful principle).
