Skip to main content

Mizrahi on Fine-Tuning and the Simulation Hypothesis

Mizrahi, Moti. "The Fine-Tuning Argument and the Simulation Hypothesis", Think (forthcoming).

The paper looks to be part of his larger project on the explanatory power of the simulation hypothesis.

Comments

Bilbo said…
I think that Mizrahi is correct that ID is not a strong "proof" for God, since there may be other designers, such as computer programmers (if we live in a computer simulation). But then, ID proponents have been claiming for years that ID is not religious in nature. So if Mizrahi is correct, then the objection that ID shouldn't be taught in public schools because it is religious in nature fails.
exapologist said…
Hi Bilbo,

I'm not sure where such a subject might be taught in public K-12 schools. (A biology class? But then the topic of cosmic fine-tuning doesn't really come up.)

Perhaps it could be discussed in college, but then of course it already is.

Best,
EA
Bilbo said…
But if we live in a computer simulation, then wouldn't all biological features also be the result of computer simulation programs? And wouldn't evolution also be the result of a computer simulation program?
exapologist said…
I'm not sure I see your point. Are you suggesting that K-12 public schools be taught simulation theory and theistic intelligent design theory in biology classes?

In any case, this was my worry in posting your original comment. The post is on the topic of Mizrahi's simulation theory, not on advocacy of ID and other theories in K-12 public schools. I'm not really interested in pursuing public policy issues at this blog. Please feel free to comment, though, if the topic comes up here at a later date.

Best,
EA

Popular posts from this blog

Epicurean Cosmological Arguments for Matter's Necessity

One can find, through the writings of Lucretius, a powerful yet simple Epicurean argument for matter's (factual or metaphysical) necessity. In simplest terms, the argument is that since matter exists, and since nothing can come from nothing, matter is eternal and uncreated, and is therefore at least a factually necessary being. 
A stronger version of Epicurus' core argument can be developed by adding an appeal to something in the neighborhood of origin essentialism. The basic line of reasoning here is that being uncreated is an essential property of matter, and thus that the matter at the actual world is essentially uncreated.
Yet stronger versions of the argument could go on from there by appealing to the principle of sufficient reason to argue that whatever plays the role of being eternal and essentially uncreated does not vary from world to world, and thus that matter is a metaphysically necessary being.
It seems to me that this broadly Epicurean line of reasoning is a co…

CfP: Inquiry: New Work on the Existence of God

NEW WORK ON THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
In recent years, methods and concepts in logic, metaphysics and epistemology have become more and more sophisticated. For example, much new, subtle and interesting work has been done on modality, grounding, explanation and infinity, in both logic, metaphysics as well as epistemology. The three classical arguments for the existence of God – ontological arguments, cosmological arguments and fine-tuning arguments – all turn on issues of modality, grounding, explanation and infinity. In light of recent work, these arguments can - and to some extent have - become more sophisticated as well. Inquiry hereby calls for new and original papers in the intersection of recent work in logic, metaphysics and epistemology and the three main types of arguments for the existence of God. 


The deadline is 31 January 2017. Direct queries to einar.d.bohn at uia.no.

Andrew Moon's New Paper on Recent Work in Reformed Epistemology...

...in the latest issue of Philosophy Compass. Here's the abstract:
Reformed epistemology, roughly, is the thesis that religious belief can be rational without argument. After providing some background, I present Plantinga's defense of reformed epistemology and its influence on religious debunking arguments. I then discuss three objections to Plantinga's arguments that arise from the following topics: skeptical theism, cognitive science of religion, and basicality. I then show how reformed epistemology has recently been undergirded by a number of epistemological theories, including phenomenal conservatism and virtue epistemology. I end by noting that a good objection to reformed epistemology must criticize either a substantive epistemological theory or the application of that theory to religious belief; I also show that the famous Great Pumpkin Objection is an example of the former. And if a copy should make its way to my inbox...

UPDATE: Thanks!