0

There is a major objection to the argument from Fine Tuning. Imagine that you have bought a ticket for a national lottery. There are, perhaps, many millions of tickets, but only one will win. It is statistically highly unlikely that you will win. But you might. If you do, however, this doesn’t demonstrate more than your good luck: it doesn’t follow from the fact that, from amongst all those millions of losing tickets, your winning ticket was chosen that this must have been the result of something more than a random selection.

[Philosophy: The basics - Nigel Warburton]

What does the word "that" mean in the sentence? I find it too complex to understand.

2

it doesn’t follow from the fact that, from amongst all those millions of losing tickets, your winning ticket was chosen that this must have been the result of something more than a random selection.

The basic structure here is

It doesn't follow from (some circumstance) that (some consequence).

This is a fairly common idiom, introduced by "follow from" where that is used to separate the precondition from the consequence.

It's made somewhat hard to follow because the circumstance part is a compound phrase, but otherwise it's a straightforward use of the word follow.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.