The argument from divine indifference

I argue that the rationale behind the fine-tuning argument for design is self-undermining, refuting the argument’s own premiss that fine-tuning is to be expected given design. In Weisberg 2010, I argued on informal grounds that this premiss is unsupported. White (2011) countered that it can be derived from three plausible assumptions. But White’s third assumption is based on a fallacious rationale, and is even objectionable by the design theorist’s own lights. The argument that shows this, the argument from divine indifference, simultaneously exposes the fine-tuning argument’s self-undermining character. The same argument also answers Bradley’s (forthcoming) reply to my earlier objection.