Enrique Sarabia Sánchez - personal identifier: G6533073
TMA 01- Part 1 Word limit: 1500/2000 words
What is Swinburne’s fine-tuning argument? Is he right that this gives us ‘substantial
evidence for the existence of God’?
This essay presents a vision of the main goal of philosophy of religion, the search of proofs
for God’s existence or inexistence. We will evaluate mainly Swinburne’s fine-tuning
argument “The Existence of God” (Swinburne1991) and we are going also to evaluate
some objections for such arguments and proofs. Swinburne focused on the physical
conditions required for the universe to start (Chappel 2011, p 104).
The fine-tuning argument also is known as (Goldilocks Principle) and consists in the
precise conditions that were necessary to enable intelligent life incarnate in a body, such
as human life at the origin of the universe. “These conditions have to be neither too much,
nor too little, but just right”, T.Chappell (2011), The Philosophy of Religion page, 102).
Swinburne defends that very unlikely features and conditions are needed for carbon-based
life. Slightly changes in the values of molecules, DNA or other elements would not make
life possible. For Swinburne, these fine-tuned values are exceptionally good proof of God’s
existence. It is one of the forms of the design argument, after the refutation that scientific
theory gave to the original design reasoning, seeks to determine the necessity of the
existence of God on the cosmological plane. It is the assumption that the variables and
constants of the cosmos have the right values for the development of life and the
existence of the universe as we know it. Further than that, fine-tuning indicates that this
configuration of values is one among millions of possible configurations that would not
make life possible. Some slight variation or increase in their strength, electromagnetism,
size could see that they do not have the same effect and that for that reason life is not
possible. It is extremely unlikely that by chance all the cosmological constants and nature
laws have acquired the right value to allow life, so the fine-tuning argument is giving us
substantial evidence of God existence.
The argument from design is used as one of God’s existence proof. If the Universe has a
structure, it must have been created by someone capable of design that order. If the
universe has these characteristics it is because it has been designed by something or
someone and must be God. This argument from design has been explained by many
philosophers. We should make a difference from a modern argument of design from the
classic argument from design. A good representation of the classic argument from design
is the visions of Paley and Hume. Behe, Meyers and Swinburne are on the other hand
good examples of the modern argument from design.
David Hume, in his book "Dialogues on Natural Religion" (Hume, 1779), described a
debate involving two persons, Cleanthes and Philo. For Cleanthes, the world is seen as a
machine, the result of design. For Philo, these thoughts are beyond our reach, but in his
opinion, the world would be more like an animal than a machine. Cleanthes can only rely
on analogy, which seems to be only a weak form of reasoning. Hume's central criticism is
based on the invalidity of the analogy argument used by the deists. But what is an
argument based on analogy? In this kind of inferences, one tries to compare or relate two
TMA 01- Part 1 Word limit: 1500/2000 words
What is Swinburne’s fine-tuning argument? Is he right that this gives us ‘substantial
evidence for the existence of God’?
This essay presents a vision of the main goal of philosophy of religion, the search of proofs
for God’s existence or inexistence. We will evaluate mainly Swinburne’s fine-tuning
argument “The Existence of God” (Swinburne1991) and we are going also to evaluate
some objections for such arguments and proofs. Swinburne focused on the physical
conditions required for the universe to start (Chappel 2011, p 104).
The fine-tuning argument also is known as (Goldilocks Principle) and consists in the
precise conditions that were necessary to enable intelligent life incarnate in a body, such
as human life at the origin of the universe. “These conditions have to be neither too much,
nor too little, but just right”, T.Chappell (2011), The Philosophy of Religion page, 102).
Swinburne defends that very unlikely features and conditions are needed for carbon-based
life. Slightly changes in the values of molecules, DNA or other elements would not make
life possible. For Swinburne, these fine-tuned values are exceptionally good proof of God’s
existence. It is one of the forms of the design argument, after the refutation that scientific
theory gave to the original design reasoning, seeks to determine the necessity of the
existence of God on the cosmological plane. It is the assumption that the variables and
constants of the cosmos have the right values for the development of life and the
existence of the universe as we know it. Further than that, fine-tuning indicates that this
configuration of values is one among millions of possible configurations that would not
make life possible. Some slight variation or increase in their strength, electromagnetism,
size could see that they do not have the same effect and that for that reason life is not
possible. It is extremely unlikely that by chance all the cosmological constants and nature
laws have acquired the right value to allow life, so the fine-tuning argument is giving us
substantial evidence of God existence.
The argument from design is used as one of God’s existence proof. If the Universe has a
structure, it must have been created by someone capable of design that order. If the
universe has these characteristics it is because it has been designed by something or
someone and must be God. This argument from design has been explained by many
philosophers. We should make a difference from a modern argument of design from the
classic argument from design. A good representation of the classic argument from design
is the visions of Paley and Hume. Behe, Meyers and Swinburne are on the other hand
good examples of the modern argument from design.
David Hume, in his book "Dialogues on Natural Religion" (Hume, 1779), described a
debate involving two persons, Cleanthes and Philo. For Cleanthes, the world is seen as a
machine, the result of design. For Philo, these thoughts are beyond our reach, but in his
opinion, the world would be more like an animal than a machine. Cleanthes can only rely
on analogy, which seems to be only a weak form of reasoning. Hume's central criticism is
based on the invalidity of the analogy argument used by the deists. But what is an
argument based on analogy? In this kind of inferences, one tries to compare or relate two
