, , , , , , ,

Arguments from fine-tuning are all the rage these days and I would like to give you my very own version of one of these arguments. It goes like this.

  1. If E then A
  2. If A then D
  3. If D then G
  4. If G then B
  5. If B then E
  6. If E, A, D, G, B, E, then ST (standard tuning)
  7. Therefore, standard tuning.

Now I know that premises 1, 4 and 5 are controversial when it comes to the tuning of the constant. Everyone uses this tuning, you can’t write any new stuff because it’s all been written, blah, blah, blah (technical talk by the way). So please allow me to refine the argument:

  1. If D then A
  2. If A then D
  3. If D then G
  4. If G then A
  5. If A then D
  6. If D, A, D, G, A, D then DT (dadgad tuning)
  7. Therefore, dadgad tuning.

Note how I revised premises 1, 4 and five by dropping a whole step and thus improving the overall soundness of the argument. I think that any true seeker of fine-tuning will agree with me that this is irrefutably the most sound fine-tuning and thus making this the most sound fine-tuning argument in all of history. You can thank me later.

In Christ