Probabilities and the Fine-Tuning Argument: A Sceptical View
Abstract
Proponents of the Fine‐Tuning Argument frequently assume that the narrowness of the life‐friendly range of fundamental physical constants implies a low probability for the origin of the universe ‘by chance’. We cast this argument in a more rigorous form than is customary and conclude that the narrow intervals do not yield a probability at all because the resulting measure function is non‐normalizable. We then consider various attempts to circumvent this problem and argue that they fail.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 3 · Cited by 126
- Authors
- McGrew, T.
- Corresponding author
- McGrew, T.
- Venue
- Mind
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2001-10-01
- Volume
- 110
- Issue
- 440
- Pages
- 1027-1038
- ISSN
- 0026-4423 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2113
- OpenAlex
- W2097678388
- Cited by
- 126
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 8.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Mind (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Space Science and Extraterrestrial Life
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Theology and Philosophy of Evil
- Keywords
- fine-tuning argument, probability, fundamental physical constants, measure functions, origin of the universe, skepticism, cosmological argument
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
