Epistemology of Design (The limitations of science)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Friday, December 25, 2009, 05:04 (5446 days ago) @ David Turell


> > Matt: Whether by God or by accident, whatever created the universe set in motion a chain reaction that would end up in ourselves. 
> >
> > The problem here is that you would have to have a quantum computer as big as the universe [...] This actually...gives a bit more weight to the idea of a universal consciousness, though what would be going through the universe's "mind" would always be in a state of flux. Since every particle contains information about the universe all things are tied together more closely than one could ever imagine.
> 
> 
> Matt: I have heard David allude to the argument that this universe is fine-tuned for life; I would counter that claim. In all of the universe, only THIS planet is known to have this "fine tuning." The universe at large, is downright hostile to life; therefore it is not the case that the universe is fine-tuned for life. 
> 
> 
> These two statements are in conflict. The universe is fine-tuned for life. It provided all the elements and conditions for an iron-rich(and metal rich)solar systerm in which an Earth could appear and foster life somehow. Only certain universes in a multiverse can do this. There seems to be general agreeemnt on this point. The anthropic principal is a handmaiden to it.-It may not be a strong argument, but it seems to me that saying "The universe is fine-tuned for life" is kinda like looking in a mirror and saying "I'm special."

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"