Fine-Tuning Argument vs Argument From Miracles

[Lion IRC]

Hey Lion IRC

Are you going to tell us what you think the universe is fine tuned for?

Why?
So you can give me ANOTHER negative rep?
So you can accuse me of trolling again - (for replying to people's questions?)
So you can take my answer and accuse me of lying (again!)
Nope. We're done pal.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, I’ve never given you a negative rep or accused you of trolling, so can you tell me what you think the universe was designed for?

 

[Lion IRC]

Sure.
Same reason Shah Jahan built the extraordinarily massive Taj Mahal - excessively huge for just one person. But that's what love does.

God could have given us a shoebox.

MP: Aye. BECAUSE we were poor. My old Dad used to say to me, 'Money doesn't buy you happiness.'

EI: 'E was right. I was happier then and I had NOTHIN'. We used to live in this tiiiny old house, with greaaaaat big holes in the roof.

GC: House? You were lucky to have a HOUSE! We used to live in one room, all hundred and twenty-six of us, no furniture. Half the floor was missing; we were all huddled together in one corner for fear of FALLING!

TJ: You were lucky to have a ROOM! *We* used to have to live in a corridor!

MP: Ohhhh we used to DREAM of livin' in a corridor! Woulda' been a palace to us. We used to live in an old water tank on a rubbish tip. We got woken up every morning by having a load of rotting fish dumped all over us! House!? Hmph.

EI: Well when I say 'house' it was only a hole in the ground covered by a piece of tarpolin, but it was a house to US.

GC: We were evicted from *our* hole in the ground; we had to go and live in a lake!

TJ: You were lucky to have a LAKE! There were a hundred and sixty of us living in a small shoebox in the middle of the road.

MP: Cardboard box?

TJ: Aye.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, that would be a good analogy if that one person could only use a small closet off in the corner of the Taj Mahal and would die instantly if he tried to go anywhere else in it.

What’s next? He’s going to show his love for a kid in a wheelchair by giving him a nice pair of running shoes? How about some gifts people can use?

 

[Lion IRC]

STARS DIED FOR US!!!!!
It really is the most poetic thing I know about physics.
...I'm getting all choked up.

 

[Lion IRC]

"why does the universe exist, why does life exist. That’s what drew me to science...
I regard it as an enormous privilege to be alive, and I regard it as a privilege to be alive especially at the end of the 20th century beginning of the 21st century, a privilege to be a scientist and therefore to be in a position to understand something off the mystery of existence, why we exist."

Was that Paley asking a why question?
Nope. Richard Dawkins.

 

[Brian63]

Am I misunderstanding this back-and-forth exchange here? Dawkins was not suggesting that the universe was fine-tuned (with intention) for any of its component parts to exist. They just happen to, and then on a floating rock in one small area of the universe the conditions resulted in life. Once genes started replicating themselves and natural selection kicked into high gear, then life evolved further. The purpose of life is to survive in the environment it is in, for the genes to extend their own lives and reproduce themselves in subsequent generations.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

"why does the universe exist, why does life exist. That’s what drew me to science...
I regard it as an enormous privilege to be alive, and I regard it as a privilege to be alive especially at the end of the 20th century beginning of the 21st century, a privilege to be a scientist and therefore to be in a position to understand something off the mystery of existence, why we exist."

Was that Paley asking a why question?
Nope. Richard Dawkins.

He's thanking his ancestors.

Before Eve talked to the serpent and ate the apple the universe was different - everywhere. It was habitable for humans everywhere. We could walk underwater without drowning and we could jump off cliffs without injury. There was no part of the cosmos that could hurt A&E because it was designed that way. Then we sinned and Mars lost its atmosphere. Black holes, radiation, trees falling over, all kinds of nasty things happened when we ate the apple. That's why it doesn't appear so finely tuned anymore. We sinned. Now it's just tuned for sinners.

 

[ideologyhunter]

It was fine-tuned, except the tuner had a hair-trigger temper, a Trump ego, and a mass murder habit. That's like finding the perfect rent-controlled apartment and learning that the manager is Charles Manson.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

It was fine-tuned, except the tuner had a hair-trigger temper, a Trump ego, and a mass murder habit. That's like finding the perfect rent-controlled apartment and learning that the manager is Charles Manson.

What is the reason Lion isn't using the standard fall argument to explain fine tuning? Everything went south after we sinned, that explains everything. It was all perfect and now it isn't. If I'm religious it makes perfect sense. If I'm not religious it's just stupid.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

"why does the universe exist, why does life exist. That’s what drew me to science...
I regard it as an enormous privilege to be alive, and I regard it as a privilege to be alive especially at the end of the 20th century beginning of the 21st century, a privilege to be a scientist and therefore to be in a position to understand something off the mystery of existence, why we exist."

Was that Paley asking a why question?
Nope. Richard Dawkins.

Ya, it’s beautiful and interesting. Who gives a shit? That’s not related to the topic.

The question is how is it that this is designed for our sake? If the point is to give us something cool to study and look at, why do we have trillions of essentially identical galaxies instead of each of them being completely unique and interesting so humanity will will have an endless selection to look at? It’s a really poor way to design something for our interest and amusement.

 

[Lion IRC]

Scientists and philosophers and mathematicians seem to find existence and the universe in which we exist interesting enough. You agree that it's beautiful and interesting.

What more does God have to do to avoid your accusation that "it's a poor way to design" the little shoe box where we live? God gives you a gift and you're complaining that it's not good enough?

 

[abaddon]

It's extremely ironic whenever a theist tries to paint atheists as incurious or like ingrates. Because it's the theist view that is pathetically small-minded. Theism devalues life and reality by insisting 'there must be something more'.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Scientists and philosophers and mathematicians seem to find existence and the universe in which we exist interesting enough. You agree that it's beautiful and interesting.

What more does God have to do to avoid your accusation that "it's a poor way to design" the little shoe box where we live? God gives you a gift and you're complaining that it's not good enough?

Umm ... ya. Given that he’s both omniscient and omnipotent, creating the most interesting thing imaginable would take him exactly the same amount of time and effort as what are essentially an endless supply of copy and paste jobs, this is essentially the equivalent of a billionaire husband getting his wife an anniversary present at the gas station on the way home. Sure, he got her something, but the vast disparity between what he could have gotten her if he’d put the slightest bit of thought into it and what he actually bothered to do really put the focus on what a half assed lack of effort went into the gift. It might be the nicest fucking thing the gas station sells, but it’s still an anniversary gift from a gas station.

 

[ideologyhunter]

She should be happy with ear buds or a Toblerone. Does it always have to be orchids and $200 French perfume?

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

It's extremely ironic whenever a theist tries to paint atheists as incurious or like ingrates. Because it's the theist view that is pathetically small-minded. Theism devalues life and reality by insisting 'there must be something more'.

Religion demands obedience and very low expectations, rather like slavery.

 

[Lion IRC]

Scientists and philosophers and mathematicians seem to find existence and the universe in which we exist interesting enough. You agree that it's beautiful and interesting.

What more does God have to do to avoid your accusation that "it's a poor way to design" the little shoe box where we live? God gives you a gift and you're complaining that it's not good enough?

Umm ... ya. Given that he’s both omniscient and omnipotent, creating the most interesting thing imaginable would take him exactly the same amount of time and effort as what are essentially an endless supply of copy and paste jobs, this is essentially the equivalent of a billionaire husband getting his wife an anniversary present at the gas station on the way home. Sure, he got her something, but the vast disparity between what he could have gotten her if he’d put the slightest bit of thought into it and what he actually bothered to do really put the focus on what a half assed lack of effort went into the gift. It might be the nicest fucking thing the gas station sells, but it’s still an anniversary gift from a gas station.

You keep on presuming that the fine tuning argument necessarily entails the Christian (biblical) God. It doesn't. The FTA works even if God isn't omniscient or omnipotent.

You are rejecting a logical argument whose premisses are scientifically defensible and which say nothing of the type of 'mind' which gave us the fine tuning, all because you think the FTA is a biblical apologetic argument.

Yes, biblical theists like me argue that the biblical God is the fine tuner. But you can make the fine tuning argument and have a bilby or a phands or an atrib as your fine tuning intellectual property rights holder. I say God's motive is loving. But the FTA doesn't speak about whether a finely tuned universe is the result of benevolence or boredom.

The FTA is just as valid and sound even if you ignore heaven and hell and original sin and Golgotha.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

The FTA is just as valid and sound even if you ignore heaven and hell and original sin and Golgotha.

That would mean also ignoring the fine tuner.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Also, where would we be without spokespersons to step up and explain why, in the cosmic setting, kids can be born with cystic fibrosis? Turns out it's because some dumb bitch living on some sort of golf course ate a piece of fruit on the advice of a walkin' talkin' snake.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Scientists and philosophers and mathematicians seem to find existence and the universe in which we exist interesting enough. You agree that it's beautiful and interesting.

What more does God have to do to avoid your accusation that "it's a poor way to design" the little shoe box where we live? God gives you a gift and you're complaining that it's not good enough?

Umm ... ya. Given that he’s both omniscient and omnipotent, creating the most interesting thing imaginable would take him exactly the same amount of time and effort as what are essentially an endless supply of copy and paste jobs, this is essentially the equivalent of a billionaire husband getting his wife an anniversary present at the gas station on the way home. Sure, he got her something, but the vast disparity between what he could have gotten her if he’d put the slightest bit of thought into it and what he actually bothered to do really put the focus on what a half assed lack of effort went into the gift. It might be the nicest fucking thing the gas station sells, but it’s still an anniversary gift from a gas station.

You keep on presuming that the fine tuning argument necessarily entails the Christian (biblical) God. It doesn't. The FTA works even if God isn't omniscient or omnipotent.

You are rejecting a logical argument whose premisses are scientifically defensible and which say nothing of the type of 'mind' which gave us the fine tuning, all because you think the FTA is a biblical apologetic argument.

Yes, biblical theists like me argue that the biblical God is the fine tuner. But you can make the fine tuning argument and have a bilby or a phands or an atrib as your fine tuning intellectual property rights holder. I say God's motive is loving. But the FTA doesn't speak about whether a finely tuned universe is the result of benevolence or boredom.

The FTA is just as valid and sound even if you ignore heaven and hell and original sin and Golgotha.

But it's not. There's this entire universe out there and only this one shoebox sized space where we can exist. If the point of the universe is to give us a place to live, regardless of who gave it to us, it's not a good way to go about it. If the point of the rest of the universe is to give us something beautiful and interesting (and it being beautiful and interesting isn't just a side effect unrelated to us), it's a half-assed way to go about it.

The FTA is essentially just a puddle of water looking at the pothole in the road and being amazed at how perfectly the shape of the pothole matches the shape of the puddle. It's not really either valid or sound.