I'm okay with George's definition, *If in fact* that is precisely how it is
used by those who discuss the Anthropic Principle (AP) in philosophy and
apologetics. I just wonder if this specific definition is actually used in
practice. It seems as if the term encourages a view of the AP in which God
is filling gaps.
As for Steve's analogy of an instrument from the factory, it is making
exactly the point I have trouble with. Why shouldn't God's creation be
perfectly "in tune" when it ships from His factory? Must he subsequently
"fine-tune" the instrument upon arrival at our door? His analogy doesn't
work for me. My view is that God's instruments ship to the customer
complete with their own gifted abilities to keep themselves in tune. They
don't need subsequent adjusting.
Doug
At 01:30 PM 10/19/00 -0500, you wrote:
>Piggy-backing, fine tuning doesn't imply re-tuning. Every time I get a
>musical instrument from the factory, it must be fine tuned, since it was
>never tuned before.
>
>- Steve
>=================================
>----- Original Message -----
>From: George Andrews Jr. <gandrews@as.wm.edu>
>To: Doug Hayworth <hayworth@uic.edu>
>Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
>Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 4:22 PM
>Subject: Re: Meaning of "fine-tuning"
>
>
> > Hi Doug;
> >
> > Its just a way of communicating the degree of precision found to be
>necessary
> > in the values of the fundamental constants in order for the universe to be
> > "precisely as it is observed to be." No need to read anything else into
>the
> > phrase. Nature is "in a habit" of fine tuning its parameters - resulting
>in
> > the evolution of orderly objects.
> >
> > Sincerely
> > George A.
> >
> >
> >
> > Doug Hayworth wrote:
> >
> > > In my admittedly cursory reading on the Anthropic Principle (AP), I have
> > > been uncomfortable with the use of the term "fine-tuning". This term
>seems
> > > to connote that God (on this list, we are all agreed that if there is
> > > anything that can be called fine tuning, it is God who does it) somehow
> > > adjusts something that was formerly only crudely "tuned". Conceptions
>of
> > > the AP that require this meaning do not appeal to me, since they imply
>that
> > > there is some background or foundational order in the Creation that is
>less
> > > than perfect or complete. As a Christian, I would prefer the term
> > > "finely-established" or "finely-created" to imply that God established
>in
> > > his initial creation a confluence of orderliness brought about his
>purposes
> > > in genesis of the cosmos, our solar system, earth, and its creatures. I
> > > don't think God had to adjust things (i.e., fine-tune) later.
> > >
> > > In practice, how do philosophers and apologists of the AP use the term
> > > "fine-tuning"? What do you folks think?
> > >
> > > I seem to remember that Howard Van Till addressed aspects of the AP at
>the
> > > Waco conference. If so, perhaps he has some wisdom here.
> > >
> > > Doug
> >
> > --
> > George A. Andrews Jr.
> > Physics/Applied Science
> > College of William & Mary
> > P.O. Box 8795
> > Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795
> >
> >
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 19 2000 - 16:34:34 EDT