= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
ciphergoth comments on The Sin of Underconfidence - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (176)
I haven't read this particular version of the fine-tuning argument, but the general counter-argument is that evolution fine-tuned life (humans) for the universe, not that the universe was fine-tuned for humans.
Unfortunately, that doesn't work. Without the fine tuning, the Universe consists of undifferentiated mush, and evolution is impossible.
That isn't any version of the fine tuning argument I've heard. And it just sounds plain stupid. Who makes this particular argument, and more importantly how do they justify it? It sounds like some wild claim that is just too irrational to refute.
To me it sounds commonplace. What is the problem you see?