Graduate studies at Western
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 39 (3):389-395 (1988)
|Abstract||Barrow and Tipler’s contention that the Anthropic Principle is obviously true and removes the need for an explanation of fine-tuning fails because the Principle is trivially true, and only within the context of a World Ensemble, whose existence is not obvious, does a selection effect become significant. Their objections to divine design as an explanation of fine-tuning are seen to be misconceived|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Errol E. Harris (1991/1998). Cosmos and Anthropos: A Philosophical Interpretation of the Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Humanity Books.
Mark Walker & Milan Cirkovic, Anthropic Reasoning and the Contemporary Design Argument in Astrophysics: A Reply to Robert Klee.
Milan M. Ćirković (2002). Anthropic Fluctuations Vs. Weak Anthropic Principle. Foundations of Science 7 (4):453-463.
William Lane Craig (2003). Design and the Anthropic Fine-Tuning of the Universe. In Neil A. Manson (ed.), God and Design: The Teleological Argument and Modern Science. Routledge.
Quentin Smith (1992). The Anthropic Coincidences, Evil and the Disconfirmation of Theism. Religious Studies 28 (3):347 - 350.
John D. Barrow (1986/1988). The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Oxford University Press.
Frank J. Tipler (1988). The Anthropic Principle: A Primer for Philosophers. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:27 - 48.
Marie I. George (1998). On the Tenth Anniversary of Barrow and Tipler's Anthropic Cosmological Principle. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 72 (1):39-58.
Fred W. Hallberg (1988). Barrow and Tipler's Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Zygon 23 (2):139-157.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads90 ( #9,710 of 739,375 )
Recent downloads (6 months)53 ( #1,033 of 739,375 )
How can I increase my downloads?