According to the Requirement of Total Evidence, when assessing the credibility of hypotheses, we should endeavor to take into account all of the relevant evidence at our disposal instead of just some proper part of that evidence. In “The Fine-Tuning Argument and the Requirement of Total Evidence,” Peter Fisher Epstein offers two alleged counterexamples to this requirement. I show that, on at least one very natural interpretation of the requirement, his alleged counterexamples are not genuine. I close by explaining why this conclusion is important.

中文翻译：

---

为全面证据的要求辩护

根据全证据要求，在评估假设的可信度时，我们应该努力考虑我们可以使用的所有相关证据，而不仅仅是这些证据的某些适当部分。在“微调论证和总证据要求”中，彼得·费舍尔·爱泼斯坦 (Peter Fisher Epstein) 为这一要求提供了两个所谓的反例。我表明，至少在对要求的一种非常自然的解释上，他所谓的反例不是真实的。我最后解释为什么这个结论很重要。