0

In the last fifty years, eminent physicists have discovered that the physical parameters of our universe are fine tuned, which means that a slight change in these parameters would render life as we know it impossible. Thus, the probability is very low that a universe with random values of these parameters has life as we know it. This has led theists to argue that the physical parameters of our universe must have been deliberately selected by God to produce life. Atheists counter that, if there are an unlimited number of other universes then, regardless of how low the probability of life in any particular universe is, life must be found in at least one universe, and we just happen to be in that particular universe. Indeed, were the parameters not those needed for life, we wouldn’t be here to inquire about it. Theists counter by saying that there is no evidence for other universes, but they have forgotten that the burden of proof is on them to show that there aren’t other universes because design inference based on statistics depends on proving that the available number of trials is limited.
This is made clear by the following example. Consider an event that has a probability of occurrence of 1 out of a billion. If the total number of available trials is 100, then we don’t expect to observe this event. But if the total number of trials is a trillion, we do expect to observe this event because it is well known that, if the total number of trials is equal to or greater than the reciprocal of the probability, then we expect to observe that event.
In conclusion, since the burden of proof is on the person who is trying to prove something, and since design inference requires proving that the total number of trials is limited, and since there is no way to prove that the total number of trials is limited, classical design arguments for the existence of God are fallacious. Is there any way to rescue classical design arguments based on statistics?

Mauro ALLEGRANZA
  • 35,764
  • 3
  • 35
  • 79
Frank McCain
  • 351
  • 2
  • 7
  • Why do you think that adding "statistic" and "multiverse" to the never ending debate about the existence of God can clarify it ? Up to now, there is no "evidence" about the existence of God, as there is no evidence of Extraterrestrial Life; but... IMO; the fact that some event has very little probability does not support a conclusion simply based on pseudo "logical" argument: sometimes someone win the lottery. As discussed before, statistical inference is a good tool to make *predictions* based on data and models. – Mauro ALLEGRANZA Oct 16 '20 at 12:22
  • The point is the burden of proof is on the person who wants to prove something. The argument isn't solved. But invoking the Multiverse defeats the classical theistic arguments since they rely on statistical probability. – Frank McCain Oct 16 '20 at 12:45
  • You still have not really understood how multiverse and statistics work. Please stop posting the same stuff over and over again as if there was any new to it. – Philip Klöcking Oct 16 '20 at 12:53
  • I apologize for my mistake. Initially I presented my question too broadly. As I considered the matter more deeply I was able to realize a more precise articulation of the question. Because the presentation of my previous questions was inferior, the answers I received did not directly address the actual issue. Thank you for contributing to the discussion – Frank McCain Oct 16 '20 at 15:24

0 Answers0