Search results

Correct, it's not a probable argument, it is a plausible explanation when given the probabilities of other possibilities. Again revisiting the arguement from before: 1) The "fine-tuning" of the universe is either due to either physical necessity, chance or design 2) It is not due to physical...

Yeah, your right, since our universes existence depends on the mechanism that brings it into existence. This is why the multiverse theory seems to only push the question back a step. We then have to ask, "why does a mechanism/machine exist that can produce billions of universes?". With this in...

I think you may have missed the point of the argument. The reason that a designer (or even a multiverse theory) is preffered in these circumstances, is because even if the probabilities involved are huge, they are able to be overcome either through intentionality (ie a designer) or with pure...

Don't you see the invalid reasoning in your argument though? You seem to be begging the question. ie. Brad: The universe as a whole and (our existence especially) seems ridiculously improbable. What can account for this? Kwayera: We exist don't we? Brad: Yes, but why and how? Kwayera: It...

Another lengthy reply to an old post from a while back. I have quoted myself so those who want to read can pick it up and follow along :) But that is exactly the point - "One tweak would have made our existence impossible". The fact that we do exist isn't proof that the laws themselves must be...

Wow, so this was from ages ago. I have been inundated with copious amounts of work over the last few months. It had been bugging me that I never got to answer properly though :P We were discussing the apparent "fine-tuning" of the universe and ways that this might fit within a naturalistic view...

Because unless you are proposing a multiverse of some sort (i.e. not the standard big bang model) then you only have 1 chance and not 10^1000000 chances.

Two points on this: First, Teleological design arguments usually include the laws themselves when assessing the probability of life existing anywhere in the universe. It asks the question "why are the laws themselves the way they are?". For example, why is the gravitational constant the...

You are correct, statistically improbable things are not impossible (one imagines the amazing improbability of you reading this post at this exact time when compared to all the other things you could have done). However, this is not what a typical design argument states. It's when an improbable...

Simply showing that we're here doesn't remove any burden of proof when weighing up the likelihood of our existence - it begs the question. You're assuming naturalism when asserting that our existence is proof of our non-coincidental nature. Imagine we're playing poker together and every single...

Does your logic work in the reverse Kwayera? :p

Aye, I realize that the sources went a little off topic, but figured it tied in enough to that original statement I qouted to be worth including - plus it was just interesting :p But I've just presented two current evangelical scholars that are willing to give up their belief in biblical...

That is a stench? Well to be perfectly honest, I wish more people on these boards had that stench (theists, atheists & agnostics alike). Would certainly make for more in depth debates don't you think?

I regard these sorts of problems as a secondary issues when it comes to looking at the question of "Does God Exist? Firstly because it assumes that only the Christian conception of God is worth defeating, and then secondly, because if a Christian is to give up belief in the innerrancy of the...

I usually approach this type of problem from the view that some of his (Gods) attributes provide him with the necessary motivation to act in certain ways. For example, love coupled with creativity may bring rise to a desire to create persons whom he can love and be in a relationship with. I...

What does "the evidence" suggest? Or are you actually referring to a lack of evidence?

Hey Sylvester, I'm interested to know what type of problems exactly you are referring to when mentioning, mistranslation and the unreliability of the bible. As far as I am aware, our current translations are very close to the original manuscripts. There will of course, always be slight...

Then I would say, per the schema I outlined, that your affirmation/disaffirmation of God x is unjustified. Without reason or evidence, what is the origin of this blind faith? I would say that in these cases you should take the middle ground with agnosticism and confess, “ I don’t know whether...

You're going to have to restate what your problem is here as I'm not sure what you mean. I think it's just a grammatical typo which seems to be making this nonsensical? Some examples might help clear this up? If we truly lack a good epistemic position then I would ask how you know "x" doesn't...

I too find it very interesting. You've prompted my mind in your dialogue in wondering whether it is even possible for something to exist without having evidence of it's existence (note that evidence in this case goes far beyond verificationism). What does it mean to say that something exists...