The Strong Anthropic Principle Viewed Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Penrose (2004: 758):

Much more problematic are versions of the strong anthropic principle, according to which we try to extend the anthropic argument to determine actual constants of nature (such as the ratio of the mass of the electron to that of the proton, or the value of the fine structure constant). Some people might regard the strong anthropic principle as leading us to a belief in a ‘Divine Purpose’, whereby the Creator of the universe made sure that the fundamental physical constants were pre-ordained so as to have specific values that enable sentient life to be possible. 

On the other hand we may think of the strong principle as being an extension of the weak one where we broaden our questions of ‘where’ and ‘when’, so that they apply not just to a single spacetime, but to the whole ensemble of possible spacetimes. Different members of the ensemble might be expected to possess different values for the basic physical constants. The where/when question now also involves a choice of universe within the ensemble, so again we must find ourselves in a universe which permits sentience to come about.

Blogger Comments:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the first interpretation of the strong anthropic principle, above, misconstrues sentient life as the purpose, rather than the result, of the fundamental physical constants, and then misconstrues this purpose as the reason for the fundamental physical constants.

The second interpretation, above, draws on the 'many worlds' interpretation of quantum physics, which misconstrues potential (possible) as actual.