Ah! I am beginning to like TGD (The God Delusion) better all the time. The chapter in which Dawkins discusses the anthropic principle was great.
Dawkins suggests the anthropic principle eliminates the necessity for God. To my mind it does nothing of the sort. It is merely an observation that if the universe were not as it is we would not be here to observe and discuss it. Actually the observation is inane. It solves nothing. It has no explanatory power. The best it does is imply that we live in a highly improbable universe. I like that. Dawkins goes on to note several other highly improbable events - the singulary at the beginning of time, the orign of life, and the origin of consciousness among them. Now, logically, since these highly improbable events have happened, doesn't it follow that the highly improbable God that Dawkins is trying to eliminate in TGD is certainly possible, as possible as the above mentioned highly improbable events?
I like that. I can live with a highly improbable God just as well as I can live in a highly improbable universe.
I seems like Dawkins undermines his own thesis. Go figure.