Closer To Truth
Closer To TruthDonate to Closer To Truth and help us keep our content free and without paywalls: https://shorturl.at/OnyRq
Free access to Closer to Truth’s library of 5,000 videos: http://bit.ly/376lkKN
The universe works for us because deep physical laws seem to work. But if the values of these laws would much change, in either direction, then all we see and know could not exist. No galaxies. No stars. No planets. No people. Do such special physical laws cry out for explanation?
Watch more interviews on why cosmic fine-tuning demands explanation: http://bit.ly/38zN9vK
Richard Swinburne is a Fellow of the British Academy. He is Emeritus Nolloth Professor of the Philosophy of the Christian Religion at the University of Oxford.
Register for free at CTT.com for subscriber-only exclusives: http://bit.ly/2GXmFsP
Closer to Truth presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.
source
46 Comments
@tedgrant2
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMHe does some amazing card tricks.
@john211murphy
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMWhy Cosmic Fine-tuning Demands Explanation? Does it? IS the Cosmos Fine-Tuned?
The question should be "Why is this Christian making stuff up just to insert his favourite imaginary friend into it".
@johnn6668
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMFine tuning is an argument for a God who doesn’t break the laws of Physics. Bible God gives Joshua a long day, floating ax head, ascensions, teleportation, walking through walls, walking on water, zombie resurrections….
@h.glover9843
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMWonderful! This is simple, beautifully offered, plausible reasoning to deny the implausible, speculative, highly imaginative offering of a multiverse. I like the phrase of Dr Swinburne: ( The concept of the multiverse) "…postulates an awful lot to explain very little." In comparison, Occam Razor ("The simplest explanation is usually the best one.") steps in here: God did it.
@jonnawyatt
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMInsufferable
@JohnSmith-bq6nf
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMThe speculative cosmologies (such as inflationary cosmology and string theory) they propose for generating alternative universes invariably invoke mechanisms that themselves require fine-tuning, thus begging the question as to the origin of that prior fine-tuning. Indeed, all the various materialistic explanations for the origin of the fine-tuning — i.e., the explanations that attempt to explain the fine-tuning without invoking intelligent design — invariably invoke prior unexplained fine-tuning.
@schuey999
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMI highly respect Mr Swinburne. Unlike most of the idiots this channel interviews, he is skeptical, careful and does not make emphatic claims about things that are far beyond our ability to comprehend.
@tedgrant2
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMI must admit, the new argument for the existence of Zeus is better than the old ones.
@SandipChitale
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMAll arguments against fine tuning as a proof of god – Physicists & Philosophers reply to The Fine Tuning Argument on skydivephil channel.
@kimanimzalendo367
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMA universe generator for the multiverses is a ridiculous idea. Clutching at straws in order to avoid acknowledging the powerful creator whose mighty work is clearly evident
@gamnamoo6195
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMA fool says in his heart "there is no God." (Bible) I pity those atheistic scientists who are desperate to avoid the divinely caused fine tuning of the universe, seeking to find an alternative explanation which turned out to be multiverse theory. It is quite interesting to see that the fact of fine tuning compels the scientists to choose between accepting it as consonent with the biblical claim of creation and rejecting it.
@andrewforbes1433
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMSwinburne loves to talk about "good things" with absolutely no foundation for defining their apparent positive values. He says that even without humans to view it, the night sky is a good thing, because it is a "marvelous dance." But that's our relationship to the night sky, not the night sky itself. For a lion, tearing apart a gazelle is a good thing. For the gazelle, denying the lion its meal is even better.
@GeezerBoy65
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMObserver selection effect at work. Plain to see. Beyond that, we cannot say at the moment.
@Nathanatos22
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AM“Many physicists say it’s completely solved” is an absurd overstatement.
To be clear, the many-worlds interpretation of quantum reality remains controversial, with some physicists arguing that it borders on metaphysical (see George Ellis and Silk’s “Scientific method: Defend the integrity of physics”, Nature magazine, 2014). Those who do defend the theory merely acknowledge that it is one of many possible explanations—but one that, unlike theism, has defined parameters.
@jaredgreenspeaks7665
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMCognitive dissonance at its finest.
@arthurwieczorek4894
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMPeople who believe in fine tuning have just replaced 'The earth is the center of the universe' with 'Humans are the center of the universe'.
@evanjameson5437
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AM,
@arthurwieczorek4894
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AM7:50 So multiverse or universe fine tuned by God for us——That's the only alternatives? Talk about a solution that is more problematic than the original problem!
@arthurwieczorek4894
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMThis guy is labouring under a pre conception—-a prejudice if you will. I am labouring under a preconception—a prejudice. I come here to compare his prejudice with my prejudice. I am thereby testing my prejudice, as best I can, for soundness.
Am I wrong in thinking that the wording of the title of this video is prejudicial toward the theistic position? Does the title assume and convey the idea that fine tuning is real? How would the title have to be worded in order to be neutral?
@dovrob
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMHi! Might you be able to help me learn more?
I've been learning about fine-tuning for a while and I can't believe I just heard this argument (that a multiverse would probably need to be very fine-tuned too). I'd love to learn more about it, but I'm having trouble finding sources that discuss this.
If you know of resources, can you please let me know?
@terrifictomm
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMThe multiverse theory as an explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe is a much less convincing argument for atheism than Francis Crick’s “panspermia” theory is for the unintended, unintelligent, non-designed origin of life.
@tedgrant2
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMThe fine tuning argument only works if you assume God cannot do miracles.
We know that God can do miracles, so he didn't need to fine tune.
He could make anything work under any conditions.
Don't underestimate the power of God !
@skiphoffenflaven8004
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMI hate to say it, but this went round and round for at least 2 minutes without going anywhere.
@charlieallansen9763
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMWhat a marvellous, articulate answer from an obviously, very humble and wise man!
@abd_allahidres9234
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMIs this science ????? 🤔
Escaping God seems to be not an easy job…
This is nonsense..
@williamburts5495
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMWhat would be the scientific proof that there are multi-universes that have no life?
@oxymoronx
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMI'm more of a Dolly Parton person myself #GetVaxxed
@oxymoronx
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMugh slay queen going for that beautiful 'I'm old and will die soon' moment. #DontStopBelieving
@joemaamaa7946
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMcringe + ratio
@boltrooktwo
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMWhy would any other universes be different if their cause is the same? Blind random chance is the least scientific answer for an effect of any explanation that exists.
@PappyGunn
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMThe first thing I'd like to say about the multiverse is "bollocks". How convenient you can't prove that particular theory. Still, it doesn't explain that THIS universe has finely tuned constants.
@fromra8569
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMMultiverse, infinite number. As goood as an explanation of that of a creator.
@TheGuiltsOfUs
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMlol
@JohanJonasson
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMHow would a god qualify as a simple explanation when it in itself has no explanatory power…
@russellbertrand3242
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMclassic philosopher nonsense. "I'll spout terms like quantum mechanics, relativity etc. I've no idea what they mean. but by christ it'll make me sound clever. and the beauty is very few people know or understand them”
ask him to quote the schroedinger equation and what the terms in it mean. Ask him to quote the Einstein field equations and what they mean. He wont have a clue. And much more importantly their significance.
And ‘fine tuning’ he wont understand that either. Or its relevance. Sad to listen to; especially knowing there are gullible Christians out there lapping it up with a spoon. Shame on him
@midlander4
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMFine tuned for poverty, loneliness, disease, inequality, religious wars and oppression.
@alcohalic6338
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMcan a universe be finite?? Just asking.
@jjcm3135
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMMultiverse hypothesis reveals naked scientific butts in this universe.
@tedgrant2
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AM"With God, nothing shall be impossible" (Luke 1:37).
Therefore the "fine tuning argument" proves Jesus was mistaken !
@rotorblade9508
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMThe Universe may look like it was fine tuned and so this would demand an explanation. What is the explanation? An invention of something unexplainable (a creator)that explains it?
What is a god? Is something all powerful, something out of time, something not made of some stuff, something that knows the absolute truth, that knows what is good and bad? Neither of these can be confirmed whether they are possible or not, they don’t seem possible. Plus as free will doesn’t seem possible it means there is no such a thing as good or bad beings
@Whatsisface4
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMGiven the many ways that our immediate environment is trying to, and succeeding at killing us you can't say say the universe is fine tuned for life.
@julianmann6172
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMRichard is spot on. Economy of hypotheses should be a central core principle of science. Hence there is no reason to invoke a multiverse at all. Cosmic fine tuning, strongly implies the existence of G-D.
@ShahadatHossain-yw3qi
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMWe are the manipulation of the universe to experience itself.
@radiowardenclyffe
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AMBy the same token a universe fine tuned for the existence of a god appears less likely than a universe fine tuned for the existence of basic carbon based life forms and who fine tuned god's universe, an infinite regression of gods?
Life is vanishingly rare but has a non zero chance of existing somewhere, life can only be observed in the areas in which it arose.
@moses777exodus
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AM2:40 Sir [Richard Swinburne], with all due respect, Multiverse is a 'hypothesis' and not a 'theory'. And as you know, there is an epic difference between the two. Best wishes, Lord-Jesus-Christ com
@moses777exodus
03/16/2025 - 3:53 AM"And it's a basic principle of scientific explanation that you shouldn't postulate too much in order to explain too little." Richard Swinburne. Thanks for sharing, Lord-Jesus-Christ com