Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

Theism and the multiverse

unitedandy
Posts: 1,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 12:36:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
As someone who has used the multiverse hypothesis to combat the fine-tuning argument, I've become less sure of its efficacy in this context for 2 reasons:

1. Explanatory poverty: Essentially, the typical world ensemble model will attempt to explain fine-tuning with reference to the inevitably of life permitting values, given either a very large number, or perhaps even infinite number of universes. It seems to me that such an explanation (assuming the multiverse was true) could explain any state of affairs. If referring to the multiverse to explain finetuning is acceptable, it seems to me that using a similar explanation to account for anything would be equally viable.

2. The typewriter objection: If there are an infinite number of universes, then by definition, there will be universes where monkeys will recreate the complete works of shakespeare, richard dawkins will become pope, and so on. This seems deeply implausible.

I should say if observation confirms it, then so much the worse for intuitions.

Thoughts?
Mestari
Posts: 4,656
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 1:01:50 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I think the first concern should only be considered in terms of the philosophical value of the argument. It seems to me that even if multiverse theory would explain any possible state of affairs, it can still be argued to be incompatible with God - a conclusion that I disagree with, but that's a discussion for another time.

The second objection only seems to be challenged by intuition insofar as we already are aware of the past state of affairs. I mean, it seems reasonable in the case that somebody asks, "What would have happened if Mr. X was president" for the answerer to simply respond, "We don't know because Mr. X was not elected president." In that case, while we can still imagine what would happen if Mr. X was president, we can reject any speculation based on the very fact that it is speculation. I think the only reason doing the same for the examples you provided seems counter-intuitive is because they are simply a further extreme.
Rules of Mafia

1. Mestari is never third party.
2. If Mestari claims an intricate and page long TP role, he's telling the truth.
3. Mestari always jointly wins with the town.
3b. If he doesn't he's mafia.
3c. If he was mafia you wouldn't suspect him in the first place.
4. If you lynch Mestari you will lose because he will be the third party Doctor or some other townie power role.
5. DP1 lynches are good.
6. The answer is always no.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 1:14:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
For those interested in this topic, see my debate on it:

Cosmological Origins: Conscious Multiverse vs. Personal Creator
http://www.debate.org...
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Reason_Alliance
Posts: 1,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 1:23:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 12:36:24 PM, unitedandy wrote:
As someone who has used the multiverse hypothesis to combat the fine-tuning argument, I've become less sure of its efficacy in this context for 2 reasons:

1. Explanatory poverty: Essentially, the typical world ensemble model will attempt to explain fine-tuning with reference to the inevitably of life permitting values, given either a very large number, or perhaps even infinite number of universes. It seems to me that such an explanation (assuming the multiverse was true) could explain any state of affairs. If referring to the multiverse to explain finetuning is acceptable, it seems to me that using a similar explanation to account for anything would be equally viable.

2. The typewriter objection: If there are an infinite number of universes, then by definition, there will be universes where monkeys will recreate the complete works of shakespeare, richard dawkins will become pope, and so on. This seems deeply implausible.

I should say if observation confirms it, then so much the worse for intuitions.

Thoughts?

Alexander Pruss I believe has a ppt somewhere on the web if you google it. I personally like the multi-verse... Also, how can I attach a photo? I have a good one to show regarding the MV.
Mestari
Posts: 4,656
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 5:46:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 1:23:08 PM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
Alexander Pruss I believe has a ppt somewhere on the web if you google it. I personally like the multi-verse... Also, how can I attach a photo? I have a good one to show regarding the MV.

I think I know what you are talking about and can find it if needed. As for photos, upload it to your album and C&P it here.
Rules of Mafia

1. Mestari is never third party.
2. If Mestari claims an intricate and page long TP role, he's telling the truth.
3. Mestari always jointly wins with the town.
3b. If he doesn't he's mafia.
3c. If he was mafia you wouldn't suspect him in the first place.
4. If you lynch Mestari you will lose because he will be the third party Doctor or some other townie power role.
5. DP1 lynches are good.
6. The answer is always no.