1. There appears to be a strong case for saying that this universe is
characterized by a long list of specific properties and dynamic
capabilities that make it "just right" for the appearance of the type of
carbon-based life that we see.
2. I personally take that as affirmative evidence that this universe was
"designed," in the specific and modern sense of having been thoughtfully
conceptualized by its Source of being for the accomplishment of some
purpose. (As a Christian I might prefer to say that in a far more
theologically meaningful way, but for now let's leave it in this minimalist
form.)
3. This use of the universe's fine-tuned nature has an interesting feature
that is sometimes overlooked by those who employ it. The fine-tuning
feature here noted is a necessary trait of the universe only if the life
forms at which we marvel are presumed to be the outcome of the universe's
(robust and gapless) formational economy.
4. If, on the other hand, one presumes that the continuity of the
universe's formational history has been broken by occasional episodes of
form-imposing divine intervention, then there is no need for the
fine-tuning. Any deviations from the fine-tuned character of this universe
could simply be compensated for by additiional episodes of irruptive divine
action. In fact, one might argue that the appearance of fine-tuning would
then be misleading.
5. Therefore, as I see it, any apppeal to fine-tuning as evidence of
"design" entails the acceptance of what I have called the "robust
formational economy principle."
6. Proponents of "Intelligent Design" reject the robust formational economy
principle.
7. Therefore, quite ironically, proponents of ID cannot make an appeal to
fine-tuning as evidence favoring their vision of "intelligent design,"
which includes, as an essential element, the necessity for occasional
episodes of "extranatural assembly by a crafty molecular artisan."
Howard Van Till