dazz
Posts: 247
Joined: Mar. 2015
|
Hi guys, new to the forums.
I've been enjoying panda's thumb a lot and just registered here to say hi and join some of the discussions, or simply read and learn from the knowledgeable guys and gals around here.
I'm not a scientist, just a software engineer so I don't claim to have any sort of expertise in evolutionary biology or cosmology, but I had a decent education and I'm tired of the IDist nonsense too.
Also, I've been having a few arguments about fine tuning and I wanted to ask what do you think about the following contention about fine tuning. I can't start a new thread being my first post, so I'll just post it here if that's ok, then if the admins deem it thread worthy we can discuss it in it's own thread later.
It's not really an original idea, just a rehash of the Euthyphro dilemma against objective morals adapted to the fine tuning crap:
So if the laws of physics are so precisely "dialed in" that the slightest change in the fundamental constants or the laws themselves would have made the universe life prohibiting, doesn't that imply that those laws of physics, the natural laws are a NECESSITY for God? Those laws are imposed to him for what life is concerned, he couldn't have made it any other way so a life permitting universe is necessarily defined by the natural laws themselves, not what god wants or decides. The laws PRECEDE God and make him contingent to the universe.
Those laws are also sufficient to explain the process by which the universe becomes a life permitting environment by forming matter, stars, planets, etc...
So natural laws are both necessary and sufficient to explain the life permitting universe, moreover, in a universe so necessarily fine tuned for life, GOD CAN'T INTERVENE SUPERNATURALLY and temporarily suspend natural laws to perform miracles for example:
If he suspends those fine tuned laws the universe should collapse, or disintegrate or whatever. If one accepts that he could suspend them and keep it going, then one should also accept he can suspend natural laws in any other potential universe that is in principle not life permitting, and allow matter and life in those other universes with different constants and/or laws too... but then fine tuning would be just an illusion and the entire argument of FT in favor of design falls apart.
So the only alternative for miracles would be that they follow natural laws, in which case one would have to ask himself if they are really miracles when no supernatural stuff is going on: one smart physicist could run a few experiments and figure out what's going on and replicate miracles in a lab!
So in conclusion, if fine tuning is true, the biblical accounts of miracles must be either cheap magic tricks or outright lies.
God is constrained to natural laws at least in the sense of them being imposed to him, as if he had to follow a user guide to create life, a guide that needed to be there beforehand regardless of the existence of that supernatural god. Actually, for all we know, the creator could have stopped existing right after the creator and we would never find about it because he can't manifest himself from his supernatural nothingness.
What do you guys think?
|
