Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Jholt's avatar

You did a great job in this debate! I was getting annoyed just watching Matt switching between different replies to the fine tuning argument; I can’t even imagine being in the hot seat and trying to respond to that. Also, the fact that he denied that if X is predicted by Y, then the existence of X makes Y more probable is hilarious. I think he was confusing epistemic probability with like objective metaphysical probability at that point in the debate.

Expand full comment
Martin Greenwald, M.D.'s avatar

Entertaining so far. Based on your opening statement, I can’t tell if you actually believe any of this stuff or if it’s all just one really elaborate philosophical prank. Well done.

Expand full comment

No posts