This is similar to the example of the man who is standing before a firing squad of 1,000,000 highly trained sharpshooters. They all fire, and he takes a breath, and opens his eyes and is still alive. They all missed. For him to still be alive, they all had to miss; he wouldn't be if they all hit. But he is still correct to assume they missed deliberately rather than by chance.
If I could only grab blue marbles, and blue marbles only occurred once out of a trillion trillion trillions, and I grabbed a blue marble on the first try, I'd lean toward the blue marble being placed deliberately rather than being a lucky draw.
If there is just one world, and if it could have been a trillion ways, but turned out to be the one way that could support living, thinking beings, then the odds against that universe existing are overwhelming. Unless you start with the assumption of naturalism being true, and rule out competing views, then the order in the universe does seem purposeful.
If the field of explanations is open, and one possible explanation is "all the correct conditions came together due to good luck," and another possible explanation is "no luck was involved; these conditions exist because they were intended to exist," the latter is much more likely.
Even if you're a dyed in the wool naturalist, you are better off explaining the fine tuning as created, and simply appealing to chance to explain the popping of the creator into existence.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original