1. Arguments From Design, First Cause, Something Rather Than Nothing, Fundamental Constants

Comment #83024 by Luweewu on October 28, 2007 at 3:31 pm

Most of these arguments are easily answered by the problem of infinite regress. However, The Fine-Tuned Universe is still a very interesting question which is most neatly resolved by the Multiverse model, or the Everett Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum physics. Let's set those aside for the moment, as they're as yet untestable and thus unscientific for argumentative purposes.


What we can say is that the Judeochristian tradition does not flesh out a god competent to finely tune a universe.



1 Kings 7:23 And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.



Joshua 10:13 So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, till the nation avenged itself on [b] its enemies, as it is written in the Book of Jashar. The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day. 14 There has never been a day like it before or since, a day when the LORD listened to a man. Surely the LORD was fighting for Israel!



Isaiah 11:12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.



Christians apparently believe that the god of Abraham was capable of delicately balancing the nuclear force such that atomic nuclei are stable, as well as figure out that the inverse square law of gravitation would be most useful in the construction of solar systems.



If this is the case, then how does one account for the above passages? Apparently God knows more about nuclear and quantum physics than the brightest minds on Earth, but he believes that pi is exactly equal to 3 and that the earth is flat (and rectangular!).



Worst of all, the book of Joshua teaches that the sun revolves around the Earth. Theists tend to respond that Joshua believed this, and god stopped the Earth and moon in their tracks without bothering to explain the difference to him. However, instant deceleration would have flung the entire biotic layer into interplanetary space and sent the moon careening toward the earth.

This doesn't exclude deistic renderings of the fine-tuning hypothesis, but it at least renders it unparsimonious. Deism is a cuckold to science anyway, and we needn't worry about its impact on society as we must be concerned about religionists.

2. What's the evolutionary advantage of offering your place to an old woman on a bus?

Comment #83018 by Luweewu on October 28, 2007 at 2:21 pm

aquilicane-- Your explanation would certainly encourage selflessness of this kind, but only if the trait is already there in the first place. It begs the question, "why do people think frailty deserves benevolence?", or "why are the elderly entitled to more gentle treatment in the first place?"

Evolutionary psychology is in large part the study of the adaptive advantage of our "gut feelings" on morality. This is at the root of this question.

Let me give you a (perhaps silly) parable as an explanation:

If you've ever seen the film I, Robot with Will Smith, you might remember his explanation for his dislike of robotic servants.

Smith's character explains at one point that years past, his car was run off a bridge, as well as another car containing a prepubescent girl. A robotic passerby assesed the wreckage and injuries, and determined that Smith's character had a higher probability of survival. On this basis, he chose to save him instead of the young girl.

A human, on the other hand, would more likely have saved the girl. The film's treats this decision as natural and requiring no further exploration.

However, it is simply a conflict between biological programming (evolutionary psychology) and robotic programming. In the former case, a human recognizes that a young female is more valuable to the propogation of the species than any man, much less one past his sexual peak.

Now consider in contrast, while we find value in preserving the elderly, it is trumped by other moral questions. Consider a burning building. We consider it morally necessary to save first the female children, then the male children, then the adult women. Adult men can fend for themselves, as they're less critical to the breeding stock.

Now, we don't consider this rationally as your second paragraph suggests. It's a gut feeling that's been forced on us over millions of years.

3. If you don't accept the supernatural, you obviously think life is depressing, meaningless and cold

Comment #83004 by Luweewu on October 28, 2007 at 1:43 pm

As far as the argument that skeptics are unhappy, depressed, loveless, etc, that hasn't been my experience. But that's anecdotal evidence, and I doubt that theists can make a better argument on firmer ground.

But let's dig a little deeper. What seems to be at the heart of this argument (theists, tell me if I'm extrapolating too far) is the belief that without god(s), there is no meaning to life, and no thus over-arching goal of the universe. Theists seem to believe that without such a primary focus of the cosmos, life itself is depressing and meaningless.

At the risk of a straw man or a fallacious reductio ad absurdum, this seems best distilled as "if life doesn't last forever, then why bother living it?"

This begs the question, "if my sandwich is delicious, but it won't last me forever, why bother taking the first bite?" The answer in both cases is the same: It's delicious and I'll take as much of the good stuff as I can get.

4. What's the evolutionary advantage of offering your place to an old woman on a bus?

Comment #82997 by Luweewu on October 28, 2007 at 1:27 pm

Sorry to call you out, aquilacane, but your explanation doesn't hold water. The question is addressing why we consider someone selfish in the first place, and why anyone bothers keeping around someone who can't carry water and pick berries.

5. What's the evolutionary advantage of offering your place to an old woman on a bus?

Comment #82995 by Luweewu on October 28, 2007 at 1:24 pm

A farming/herding society, such as we have had for the last 10,000-odd years is always looking for new land, fresher soil, greener grass. The elderly are an obvious disadvantage.

However, humans evolved as hunter/gatherers. It is more advantageous for hunter/gatherers to maintain one territory very well. Especially in pre-literate societies such as these, the adaptive advantage of caring for the elderly was indispensible. The elderly alone possesed decades of knowledge as to where certain prey animals graze or nest, and where certain edible and medicinal fruits grow. They also had the most refined and practiced memes for building boats, axes, bows, hand axes, fires, homes, etc.

This is why we feel an intrinsic need to keep them around and healthy, because it makes it easier for us to be well and multiply.