David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Sophia 48 (2):195 - 210 (2009)
Within the Cognitive Science of Religion, Justin Barrett has proposed that humans possess a hyperactive agency detection device that was selected for in our evolutionary past because ‘over detecting’ (as opposed to ‘under detecting’) the existence of a predator conferred a survival advantage. Within the Intelligent Design debate, William Dembski has proposed the law of small probability, which states that specified events of small probability do not occur by chance. Within the Fine-Tuning debate, John Leslie has asserted a tidiness principle such that, if we can think of a good explanation for some state of affairs, then an explanation is needed for that state of affairs. In this paper I examine similarities between these three proposals and suggest that they can all be explained with reference to the existence of an explanation attribution module in the human mind. The forgoing analysis is considered with reference to a contrast between classical rationality and what Gerd Gigerenzer and others have called ecological rationality.
|Keywords||Cognitive science of religion Evolutionary psychology Classical rationality Ecological rationality Explanation attribution|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Gerd Gigerenzer (1999). Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart. Oxford University Press.
Elliott Sober & E. Sober (2007). Sex Ratio Theory, Ancient and Modern: An Eighteenth-Century Debate About Intelligent Design and the Development of Models in Evolutionary Biology. In Jessica Riskin (ed.), Genesis Redux: Essays in the History and Philosophy of Artificial Life. University of Chicago Press. 131--62.
Jeffrey Koperski (2005). Should We Care About Fine-Tuning? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (2):303-319.
Clare Harries & Mandeep K. Dhami (2000). On the Descriptive Validity and Prescriptive Utility of Fast and Frugal Models. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):753-754.
John S. Wilkins & Wesley R. Elsberry (2001). The Advantages of Theft Over Toil: The Design Inference and Arguing From Ignorance. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 16 (5):711-724.
Graham Wood (2007). Fine-Tuning 'Analogies' and the Law of Small Probability. Philo 10 (2):149-157.
Graham Wood (2006). The Fine-Tuning Argument: The ‘Design Inference’ Version. Religious Studies 42 (4):467-471.
José Luis Bermúdez (2000). Rationality, Logic, and Fast and Frugal Heuristics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):744-745.
Added to index2009-05-11
Total downloads144 ( #4,073 of 1,006,202 )
Recent downloads (6 months)72 ( #408 of 1,006,202 )
How can I increase my downloads?