Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that For life to be possible, the cosmological constant Λ must be fine-tuned to an extraordinarily precise degree, not varying more than one part in 10^53.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The value of Λ may be physically necessary rather than contingent, if a final theory of quantum gravity constrains it to its observed value.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Fine-tuning arguments presuppose a probability distribution over possible constants, but without a physical ensemble, this distribution is undefined.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An undefined probability space cannot ground claims of improbability, undermining the inferential force of the fine-tuning observation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Weinberg (1987) demonstrated via anthropic reasoning that Λ must fall within a life-permitting range given that observers exist to measure it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If observer-selection effects fully explain the observed value of Λ, the fine-tuning requires no further theistic or design-based explanation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An explanatory factor that is both sufficient and naturalistically grounded defeats the inference to a transcendent fine-tuner.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The expansion rate of the universe is represented by the cosmological constant Λ.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Λ were slightly greater, there would be no energy sources such as stars.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If Λ were slightly less, the Big Bang would have quickly led to a Big Crunch in which the universe collapsed back onto itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.