Does the Anthropic Principle argument for God sound arrogant to you?

Using the anthropic principle as an argument for the existence of a deity IS arrogant. It's also a complete misunderstanding of what the anthropic principle implies.

Even if we assume that this world seems to be designed for life (rather than the other way around), that does not mean that it was, precisely because we do not know what came before it or might exist (for some reasonably meaningful definition of "existence") alongside it, and the only world that we could ever observe would be one in which we (as in, our kind of life) could exist.

It sounds ignorant. No one who understands the anthropic principle would use it as an argument for the existence of a god.

However unlikely the conditions necessary for the existence of intelligent life, the fact remains that the universe cannot be obesrved except in the presence of those conditions, because they are necessary for the existence of an observer. There could be a billion universes, each with a trillion planets, and we would always happen to end up on the one that supports life. We couldn't logically be anywhere else.