Premium
MULTIPLE UNIVERSES AND THE FINE‐TUNING ARGUMENT: A RESPONSE TO RODNEY HOLDER
Author(s) -
ROTA MICHAEL
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
pacific philosophical quarterly
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.914
H-Index - 32
eISSN - 1468-0114
pISSN - 0279-0750
DOI - 10.1111/j.1468-0114.2005.00242.x
Subject(s) - argument (complex analysis) , philosophy , subject (documents) , white (mutation) , computer science , chemistry , biochemistry , library science , gene
In this article I examine a common objection to the fine‐tuning argument (an objection which may be referred to as the atheistic many universes (AMU) objection). A reply to this objection due to Roger White has been the subject of much controversy; White's reply has been criticized by Rodney Holder, on the one hand, and Neil Manson and Michael Thrush on the other. In this paper I analyze Holder's work in an effort to determine whether the AMU objection successfully defeats the fine‐tuning argument. I conclude that the fine‐tuning argument can be reformulated so as to avoid the AMU objection.