(February 10, 2014 at 4:25 pm)hatsoff Wrote: That's not exactly it, no. The argument aims to show that on naturalism, the life-permitting range of values is relatively small. Obviously, there are many more possibilities once we look at the supernatural. And that's one of the things the theist wants us to do---start looking at options other than naturalism.If they are making the point that the universal constants are so finely-tuned that they might point at a creator, that's a lot like the argument that I cannot prove god doesn't exist. We cannot move any further, IMO, until the theist makes his case at this point. SOC works from the premise that the universe is the creation of the Christian god and (based on his recent response to my question) that there is at least one other set of parameters that would support life, albeit in a different form.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
-Stephen Jay Gould
