In recent years, several authors have criticized fine-tuning arguments for failing to show that the universe’s purported fine-tuning for intelligent life calls for explanation. In this paper, I provide a systematic categorization and a detailed evaluation of the proffered critiques. I shall argue that these critiques fail to undermine fine-tuning arguments in the sense that, for all such critiques show, the universe’s fine-tuning for intelligent life can be justifiably taken to call for explanation. I then explicate the implications of this result for the ongoing philosophical debate concerning the merits of fine-tuning arguments.