What is the referent of "this" in your sentence and what is a serve serving argument?
If you are saying that Smolin's argument is self serving, that is not correct. Smolin addresses the mystery that the laws of physics need to be extremely fine tuned (in their current version) to reach our universe. For the vast majority of parameter settings (e.g. choice of the Planck Mass and other fundamental constants) life would be impossible. Why did it happen that the constants were so balanced on a needle? Smolin shows that two simple and plausible hypotheses cause this fine tuning to happen automatically, by evolution. His theory is also falsifiable, making various predictions. He argues that the available evidence indicates his theory is correct, i.e. his predictions will be verified, but it is certainly far from conclusive. It may become more conclusive, however, with more research.
I gather some posters here think that the proposed variation of physical laws is somehow an argument for a creator and against the theory of evolution, but in fact it is a plank in the proposal of evolution on a much grander scale, evolution of the laws of physics itself, leading to laws of physics that support life, as well as leading to life.
Ha, I try not to get too theological...
I guess I have always been satisfied with an anthropic explaination, ie. that the laws of physics had to be the way they are in our univers precisely b/c they had to support us (which is easiy if you assume infinite Universes with varying laws of physics). Maybe its a cop out...
This is a pretty good book for the layperson on the required precision of certain physical constants, ratios, writtwn by Matthew Rees: Just Six Numbers. I seem to recall that it wasn't really meaty