Drumdude, I can see your point that no real probability information is included. I might incline to think the unknown aspect is large enough that probability is not a useful word in this context. If my skeptical cap slips on I prefer thinking that the universe is made the way it is and has always been in its recurring presence. Turtles all the way down. Of course I can imagine multiple changing universes. Nothing to stop the speculation. Either variation and perhaps others show fine tuning to not be proof.drumdude wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 9:32 pmIt's clear when you see how he edited his post. He was trying to say that surviving a 33-thousand-foot fall was as unlikely as a universe popping into existence with the exact properties necessary for human life to exist. Clearly, it's not. Now he has added the additional condition that a drop of his favorite soft drink not be spilled during the fall.huckelberry wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 9:22 pm
Drumdude, the person surviving a 33 thousand foot fall is interesting. I am not following what you are seeing as Daniel proving the point against him. I do not understand what you see that you think he has gotten wrong.
It demonstrates that his belief in something being unlikely is an assumption. He didn't know what the odds were for surviving a fall from that height and now he does. He doesn't know what the odds are for specific Universal conditions being created, either. It's likely he's just as wrong there as well.
I find it suggestive in the face of uncertainty.
I think Peterson was making a poetic not mathematical observation that the existence of life in the universe is surprising and amazing. That is why he made a comparison to an extraordinary fall which he originally described as resulting in no injury unlike the known experience you brought to our attention. He added the extra about unspilled drink to emphasize that for any reader missing that point I would expect.