"Teleological argument for God's existence."

The Teleological or Fine-tuning argument for God's existence. A review of current cosmological findings, observations & calculations that may explain why the universe is rationally intelligible, law-abiding and life-permitting. Three possible explanations are discussed chance, physical necessity or design.

The Teleological Argument for God's Existence in logical format:

1. The fine-tuning of the initial conditions of the universe is due to necessity (the laws of nature), chance, or design.

2. It is not due to physical necessity
2.1 abstract Laws (dont create anything)
2.11 Implausibility
2.12 Arbitrary Quantities (eg ratio of mass proton to neutron)
2.13 matter itself is mindless
2.14 Theory of Everything (doesnt exist)

2.2 Chance
2.12 extreme Improbability of all the many independent constants being fine-tuned to permit galaxies/stars to form
2.13 Anthropic Principle
2.14 Anthropic Principle with a World Ensemble

3. Therefore, it is due to design.
4. The rational intelligibility of the universe implies an intelligent designer

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• God
• Arguments for God's existence
• fine-tuning
• teleology
• science
• scientism
• atheism
• multiverse theory
• god of the gaps
• cosmology
• Penrose
• Hawking
• Einstein

[Gericho49]

Ultimate chaos is the logical result of blind forces, mindless processes & chance. It is a science ender. On the other hand, if the universe is orderly, predictable, knowable or as Einstein put it, “comprehensible “it exudes intelligence. If there is not design that is intelligible, there is no possibility for science of any kind. We don’t get unintelligible intelligibility. "It is amazing how fiercely atheists oppose intelligence when the design inference is so overwhelming." Dr. S Meyer

[Gericho49]

“Beginning in the 1960s, scientists began to notice a strange connection among a number of coincidences in physics. It turns out that many mysterious values and relationships in physics could be explained by one overriding fact: Such values had been necessary for the creation of life. The physicist Robert Dicke was the first to draw attention to this relationship.The scientist John Wheeler, a prestigious practitioners of cosmology, became interested in the idea in the 1960s. cont'd

[Gericho49]

Then, at Wheeler’s urging, Cambridge University astrophysicist and cosmologist Brandon Carter presented the observation in full-blown form at the Copernican Festivities (celebrating the 500th birthday of Nicolaus Copernicus).”

Carter coined the term “anthropic principle” (also sometimes referred to as “anthropic fine tuning”) to describe this concept.Anthropic fine-tuning is a big topic that has been explored extensively, but the basic idea is easy to grasp.

[Gericho49]

“Astronomers who do not draw theistic or deistic conclusions are rare, &even the few dissenters hint that the tide is against them. Atheist Geoffrey Burbidge, of the University of California, complains "my fellow astronomers are rushing off to join ‘the 1st Church of Christ of the Big Bang"

“A scientific discovery is also a religious discovery. There's no conflict between science& religion. Our knowledge of God is made larger with every discovery" JTaylor, Nobel Prize in physics.

[Gericho49]

examples of analogy (only for those wanting to enlighten themselves)

1. Her face was a perfect oval, like a circle that had its two sides gently compressed by a ThighMaster.

2. His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking alliances like underpants in a dryer without Cling Free.

3The hailstones leaped from the pavement, just like maggots when you fry them in hot grease.

[Gericho49]

@BailiffQuimby "Last I checked, it was a comparison between two situations illustrating a similar relationship"

Please explain how two competing explanations for the SAME scientific observation is an analogy?.

Analogies are attempts to transfer information from one subject to a DIFFERENT subject. Come on Buffy, admit that u goofed on this one! We all make mistakes only closedminded egotists wont admit it! I suspect u may be in the latter category.

[Gericho49]

@BailiffQuimby "The only explanation you can think of for why these constants..."

Correction: I have listed 3 explanations(didnt watch the video did u?) Science is about drawing hypothesis & making plausible predictions. No scientist I know of, has come up with a materiatistic or natural explanation. Teleological argument is one of many for God's existence. Paradoxically!the number of deniers hopelessly obessessed with trying to prove (to themselves) there is no God is another.

[Gericho49]

@BailiffQuimby "There's a difference between traditional philosophy, which is primarily bulls*** "

If ur going to demean the 1000s of professors & students since Plato et al who have made the subject their life's work, u will need more than an unsubstantiated opinion & insults.

Please indicate with examples otherwise we would have to conclude u just ridicule facts that are inconvenient to your ideology.

[BailiffQuimby]

@Gericho49 "The only rational explanation for why ALL these independent constants have the knife-edge values is by choice- a profoundly omniscient Designer!"

Correction: The only explanation you can think of for why these constants (they're not all independent, btw) have their current values is a profoundly omniscient designer. The explanation is not rational, nor can you demonstrate that it is the only one.

[BailiffQuimby]

@Gericho49 "u need to check what an analogy is, friend!"

Last I checked, it was a comparison between two situations illustrating a similar relationship. Like if you compared my denials of your chance vs. design argument to your hypothetical denial, of physical necessity, were it proven.

"Moreover, "the universe would have almost certainly formed/collapsed" is NOT my conclusion."

No, your conclusion is "...therefore there's a god." That's the part I'm objecting to.