Religious Studies 28 (3):347 - 350 (1992)
|Abstract||The anthropic principle or the associated anthropic coincidences have been used by philosophers such as John Leslie (1989), William Lane Craig (1988) and Richard Swinburne (1990) to support the thesis that God exists. In this paper I shall examine Swinburne's argument from the anthropic coincidences. I will show that Swinburne's premises, coupled with his principle of credulity and the failure of his theodicy in The Existence of God, disconfirms theism and confirms instead the hypothesis that there exists a malevolent creator of the universe.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Mark Walker & Milan Cirkovic, Anthropic Reasoning and the Contemporary Design Argument in Astrophysics: A Reply to Robert Klee.
John Leslie (1986). Anthropic Explanations in Cosmology. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1986:87 - 95.
Milan M. Ćirković (2002). Anthropic Fluctuations Vs. Weak Anthropic Principle. Foundations of Science 7 (4):453-463.
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.
Daniel Howard-Snyder (1996). God Without the Supernatural: A Defense of Scientific Theism. [REVIEW] Journal of Religion.
A. T. Nuyen (2001). The "Ethical Anthropic Principle" and the Religious Ethics of Levinas. Journal of Religious Ethics 29 (3):427 - 442.
Mark Walker (2009). The Anthropic Argument Against the Existence of God. Sophia 48 (4):351 - 378.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads25 ( #55,623 of 722,742 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,247 of 722,742 )
How can I increase my downloads?