The Fine Tuning Argument for God’s Existence

                Ever wonder the odds of winning the lottery? How about the odds of winning the lottery twice? Multiple lotteries in multiple states on the same night? We congratulations you and everyone in the universe have appeared to win a large cosmic lottery! What I am talking about is that fine tuning argument for the existence. I have seen different variations on this argument, either universally in the mathematical constants (gravity, strong/weak nuclear force, etc.) to the placement of our planet Earth. What I would like to do with this post is explore where we can see fine tuning and how it points to an intelligent designer of the universe.

                Starting with the mathematical constants for the universe, this argument starts with an analogy of the fundamental constants of the universe being on a sliding scale. If these constants were to be changed a small amount, then the universe would be uninhabitable for life. For example, if the cosmological constant were increased, then the universe would expand at such a rate that particles would never come together so that stars, planets, and humans would never come to be.

                One can also look at the exact placement of our planet earth for an example of fine tuning, though it is very possible that I am confusing this for another argument and if so I will come back and fix this. But back to the topic one can look at all of the conditions that the Earth must fulfill in terms of placement and size to permit human life to come about. With relation to our Sun, we are far enough away to not be too hot and close enough to not be too cold. Our Earth is also the right size to permit humans to be the size we are. If the Earth were much larger, life would not be much larger than probably insects. If our solar system were placed somewhere being bathed in radiation or somewhere close to a blackhole, then life wouldn’t have lasted as long as it has, and that’s saying something because life as only been around a small percentage of the estimated lifespan of the Earth and an even smaller percentage of the universe itself.

                With this quick introduction, what are the objections to this argument? Well there are quite a few people who are arguing that we just came about through chance, but the calculated odds of this coming to be are more than astronomically small. Then there is the appeal to the multiverse, whih states that there are an infinite number of universes so naturally a life permitting universe or two would come about. The problems with the multiverse theory are that there is no way to observe, measure, or prove the existence of such a universe. There are versions of this theory that dictate a machine pumping out universes, so then this machine has to have some form of fine-tuning as well. A second objection is that the universe is necessarily life-permitting, meaning that the universe has to be life permitting. As I mentioned above, it is far more likely that a universe will be life prohibiting that permitting. Fine-tuning therefore isn’t a necessary property of the universe.

                So these arguments are the most common, but by showing these arguments don’t hold water, then we are left with a universe that has been consciously designed by an extremely powerful being to permit life. This being isn’t some impersonal deity that I appeal to for the filling of the gaps in human knowledge, He is a personal being who desires for us to know Him, and has sent his Son so that we can do just that. God bless and have a good rest of your night.