Fine Tuning Argument

This website has been moved to: https://debatemap.live

Structure

The idea of an argument that:

  • An argument that supports a being that transcends the universe.
Foundation (A)

Summary

1. The fine-tuning of the universe is due to either physical necessary, chance, or design.
2. It is not due to physical necessity or chance.
3. Therefore, it is due to design.

Discussion

1. The fine-tuning of the universe is due to either physical necessary, chance, or design.

Fine-tuning is a scientific fact.

These are the only alternatives for explaining fine tuning.

2. It is not due to physical necessity or chance.

Not physical necessity, for the constants and quantities are independent of nature's laws.

A 'theory of everything' will explain them.

A 'theory of everything' doesn't explain everything.

M-theory fails to predict a life-permitting universe.

Not chance.

Some universe must exist, no matter how improbable.

But whichever universe exists, it will probably not be life-permitting.

We can observe only life-permitting universes, so no explanation is needed.

This truism does not remove the need for an explanation.

Many worlds hypothesis.

Many worlds hypothesis may still require fine-tuning.

The multiverse is finite.

Invasion of the Boltzmann brains.

3. Therefore, it is due to design.

This follows from 1 and 2.

Who designed the Designer?

To recognize an explanation as the best, you don't need an explanation of the explanation.

Mind is simpler than the universe.

Conclusion

1. Supports a being that transcends the universe.

As the designer of the universe, the cause cannot be in the universe.

2. Supports a designer of the universe.

That the fine-tuning of the universe is due to design entails a designer of the universe.


Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License