Argument from Improbability - It doesn't work. Seriously
I'd like to write a bit about something that bothers me quite a lot: the argument from improbability. Given that this is my account, and not yours, I really am going to write it.
The argument from improbability basically states that the world in which we live, the circumstances which we see, life itself, are all too complex to have happened by chance. I believe Christian apologists (I love that term - they have to call themselves apologists because there's just so much for which to apologize!!) have "calculated" that the probability of everything happening exactly the way it has happened by chance is 1:[more atoms than exist in the universe] against, so there must be something guiding everything. Sounds pretty daunting, doesn't it? Even leaving aside the fact - yes, I said fact, for fact it is - that evolution is not random because many, many people have written on the subject, the argument from improbability is conceptually flawed.
Imagine, if you would, a coin. Better still, go get one, as I have. Ooh, look, a South Carolina commemorative quarter, 2000. Take your coin and flip it once. I don't care how you do it, just add the element of random(ish) motion. What did you get? I got tails. There was a 50% chance, or a probability of .5, that I was going to get heads, and a probability of .5 to get tails. It seems like I had a 1:2 against chance of getting tails and just happened to really get tails, but we now know that I did get tails. There is not a 1:2 chance I did get tails, it happened and I documented it. Now another flip... heads this time. 1:2 chance of that on a single toss, 1:4 that I would get exactly one tails and then one heads, but that is what I got. Another toss, another heads, and if I were to try to predict that the next three coin tosses would be exactly "tails, heads, heads" I would give that a probability of 1:8. A fourth toss reveals tails, 1:16 to repeat, but it did happen
The issue, the application to the argument from improbability, is that it is meaningless to attempt to determine the precise probability of events that really did happen, except to determine how probably it would be for said events to happen again (independent incidence of life in another part of the universe, for example). The probability of our sun having formed exactly the way it did, or the moon being exactly where it is is useless: that is the way it happened, and if it had happened differently then it would be different! We don't live in some magical universe which was finely tuned for our habitation - of no more than a minuscule particle of the whole - we adapted to our tiny shred because we live in a universe in which our form of life can come about under the circumstances that really did just happen to be there. If those circumstances had been different, then we likely would not be here to mourn that fact. If the universe was "tuned" differently, sans Strong Force, for example, there might be no variety of atoms and no life ever. It doesn't matter, because we do live in this universe. It did happen.
Life might not happen again - so be careful with those bloody nukes, please! - but in an infinite universe it is possible that it might. Life has never needed a god to make things happen, and it never will.
(Originally posted at http://www.thisisby.us/index.php/content/argument_from_improbability )
"But still I am the Cat who walks by himself, and all places are alike to me!" ~Rudyard Kipling
Mazid the Raider says: I'd rather face the naked truth than to go "augh, dude, put some clothes on or something" and hand him some God robes, cause you and I know that the naked truth is pale, hairy, and has an outie
Entomophila says: Ew. AN outie
- Mazid the Raider's blog
- Login to post comments