The fine tuning argument

[solja247]

In my opinion, the fine tuning arguement, is one of the strongest theist arguements and it makes a lot of sense as well. No serious scientist (not even Dawkins) contends the fact that the universe appears to be designed.
For the universe (multiverse?) to arrive by chance is astronomical! Its pretty much impossible . Since our understanding of the universe is becoming even more complicated, saying it was a chance, is becoming less probable.
I dont want to say this proves God exists, but it is rather compelling, really compelling in my opinion.
What do you guys have to say?

Note: Dont try to use Occam's razor here. Occam's razor removes multiverses and other theories in modern physics and astronomy.

[Tiberius]

If the universe wasn't in a position to support life, this argument wouldn't exist, because life wouldn't exist.

Douglas Adams parodied this argument:

Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in, an interesting hole I find myself in, fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it's still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.

Put simply, the only reason we consider this to be an argument is because we are here, and we can't exist if the universe were somehow tuned some other way. It doesn't mean the universe was tuned *for us*; it just means that we are possible because the universe is like this.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

No serious scientist (not even Dawkins) contends the fact that the universe appears to be designed.

No true Scotsman fallacy. Plus ,that is not a fact it's an assertion based on perception.


To repeat myself from an earlier post today: The teleological argument is one of the oldest and most thoroughly refuted arguments for the existence of God.There is no consensus on the proposition.

A teleological argument, or argument from design[1][2][3], is an argument for the existence of God or a creator based on perceived evidence of order, purpose, design, or direction — or some combination of these — in nature. The word "teleological" is derived from the Greek word telos, meaning "end" or "purpose". Teleology is the supposition that there is purpose or directive principle in the works and processes of nature. Immanuel Kant called this argument the Physico–theological proof[4].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleologica...ic_concept


.

[Minimalist]

I think you had better read Dawkins again...... or once.

[Zen Badger]

For the universe (multiverse?) to arrive by chance is astronomical! Its pretty much impossible .

And you know this to be so because............................?

The fine tuning argument usually goes along the lines of
"The universe must be designed because our kind of life wouldn't exist otherwise"

Null argument, if the universal constants were different all it would mean is that some other kind of life would have arisen. There is NO requirement for our kind of life to exist.

[Shinylight]

The chance of the universe existing is 1.

[Skipper]

I think you had better read Dawkins again...... or once.

I think he's right in saying Dawkins says he dosen't contend the universe APPEARS to be designed, but he then conveniently ignores that when Dawkins says that it is only as a starting point to go onto his "who created the creator" argument. Good old out of context, creationist/ID misquoting at it's best.

For the universe (multiverse?) to arrive by chance is astronomical! Its pretty much impossible .

Yea, lets make something we perceive as highly improbably totally plausible by brining in an even more complex and improbable "God" into the mix.

[Captain Scarlet]

Fine tuning refutes the design argument before it gets off the ground. When it does get off the ground it is deeply unimpressive as its an argument from incredulity.

It refutes design becuase it says "gee look on the universe could be hugely different if any of these parameters varied by even the smallest fraction". This ignores the fact that if true, the so called Design of the universe is fundamentally flawed becuase its therefore hugely fragile and an omnipotent creator would have been able to creaste something more robust and more likely to lead to the result intended. Still a problem for those proposing the argument and not for the alternative hypotheses on the universe.

Fine tuning makes large claims about how unlikely thing are to have turned out this way, quoting outrageous probabilities, but never compares them against the probablility of the universe turning out any other way. This is becuase none of us know. It is possible that the universe could only ever turn out this way, or that there is a multiverse were every possible universe exists, or that there are many life permitting universes. Until we know more there is no point saying that we have a 10 to the power 500 chance of being here, becuase in reality this is not known.

[The Omnissiunt One]

Other forms of life might have arisen. Ours isn't at all special. Indeed, is life special at all? It's a biochemical phenomenon which occupies a tiny corner of one galaxy among billions. We'd be more justified in saying that the universe was designed to create large amounts of empty space.

[Captain Scarlet]

Other forms of life might have arisen. Ours isn't at all special. Indeed, is life special at all? It's a biochemical phenomenon which occupies a tiny corner of one galaxy among billions. We'd be more justified in saying that the universe was designed to create large amounts of empty space.

Absolutely. There is more matter in black holes than any other phenomena, and according to the physics this universe is the perfect black hole creator. Therefore the obvious conclusion is that the universe was fined tuned to create black holes and we are the bio-chemical scum on top of an insignificant rock, in a hum drum solar sytem, with to an average main sequence star, in a standard galaxy.