John Lennox, William Lane Craig and the Fine Tuning of the Universe

I felt sort of bad doing any kind of refutation regarding Lennox. He's just so cuddly and earnest and, more importantly, smart. For the record, the only qualification that I view of any consequence on Craig's resume is his doctorate in philosophy, but even that has been used simply to back up his faith from experience.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• john
• lennox
• william
• lane
• craig
• apologist
• apologetic
• atheist
• atheism
• th1swasatriumph
• refute
• refutation
• the
• argument
• from
• fine
• tuning
• of
• universe
• probability
• improbability
• philosphy
• debate

[MoonwalkerWorshiper]

@Murchad99 The conditions that allow life in the universe can only occur when certain fundamental physical constants lie within a very narrow range, so that if any constants were only slightly different the universe would be unlikely to be conducive to the establishment and development of matter, astronomical structures, and life as it is presently understood. That is the fine tuning argument.

[Murchad99]

@MoonwalkerWorshiper So since I'm almost afraid to read back at how much of this topic Hektor already argued with you to have you dismiss it out of hand, why don't you state for me YOUR fine tuning argument, insomuch as it does not apparently involve any notion of intelligent design?

[Murchad99]

@MoonwalkerWorshiper "intelligent design is most plausible but it's not within the fine tuning argument."

You keep attempting to disassociate the two, but inevitably it creeps back into your reasoning.. it's inherent in your use of the term and disingenuous to imply otherwise. FTU stripped down is almost tautological.. the universe is what it is because of the way it is and were it any other way it'd be different. The "argument" occurs when you add unsupported suppositions.

[MoonwalkerWorshiper]

@Murchad99 No I can't see any difference because you haven't explained any. You just attacked a specific sentence of mine, the statement that I won't be persuaded that a logically impeccable argument can be wrong, and told yourself this means I can't be reasoned with. Accepting logic as neccessary truth IS being a reasonable person because I respect the value of logic.

Sure intelligent design is most plausible but it's not within the fine tuning argument.

[Murchad99]

@MoonwalkerWorshiper "Quote-mining eh?"

Most definitely. But if you can't see the difference in what you first wrote and what you just clarified, then "nothing will convince you" that you definitely deserved it.

The fine-tuned universe proposition states that the universal constants must be essentially what they are for life as we know it to exist. What you're advancing is the further notion that this necessarily demonstrates intelligent design. Is that correct?

[MoonwalkerWorshiper]

@Murchad99 Quote-mining eh? Perhaps you missed the comment I wrote that begins with "You ask me, is there any way I could percieve fine tuning as false." and then I went on to explain why the fine-tuning argument is logically impeccable. I'm proud to accept and believe an argument based on irrefutable logic and I don't find a reason to doubt it until you give me one. Instead of argueing against the argument (because you can't) you just write a smartass condescending reply.

[Murchad99]

@MoonwalkerWorshiper "No, nothing can convince me that fine tuning is wrong." I applaud you, sir. If more ideologues who are equally allergic to open-minded critical analysis and re-evaluation were up-front about their debilitation, we would have fewer people urinating in the collective pool of scientific discovery and philosophic reasoning with their pigheaded preconceived beliefs. Hopefully your rash of honesty will spread to other Theist posters.

[cmottes]

@mathew2283 Thank you and yes, that confirms a misunderstanding. That's big G. The gravitational constant.

[mathew2283]

@cmottes You said life could not exist if gravity was 2% stronger.