The weak anthropic principle and the design argument
Zygon 31 (1):115-130 (1996)
| Abstract | The design argument for God’s existence was critically assessed when in the growth of modern science the cognitive value of teleological categories was called into question. In recent discussions dealing with anthropic principles there has appeared a new version of the design argument, in which cosmic design is described without the use of teleological terms. The weak anthropic principle (WAP), a most critical version of all these principles, describes the fine-tuning of physical parameters necessary to the genesis of carbon-based life. Consequently, a new version of the philosophical design argument can be developed on the basis of the weak anthropic principle.(edited) | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,679 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesJanis T. Ozolins (2008). Is the Anthropic Principle a Poor Man's Intelligent Design? Ethics Education 14 (1):25 - 37.
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.
Milan M. Ćirković (2002). Anthropic Fluctuations Vs. Weak Anthropic Principle. Foundations of Science 7 (4):453-463.
Stefano Bettini (2005). Anthropic Reasoning in Cosmology: A Historical Perspective. In Formale Teleologie Und Kausalitã¤T in der Physik. Mentis Verlag.
Neil A. Manson (2009). The Fine-Tuning Argument. Philosophy Compass 4 (1):271-286.
Ira M. Schnall (2009). Anthropic Observation Selection Effects and the Design Argument. Faith and Philosophy 26 (4):361-377.
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.
Jonathan Weisberg (2005). Firing Squads and Fine-Tuning: Sober on the Design Argument. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (4):809-821.
William Lane Craig (1988). Barrow and Tipler on the Anthropic Principle Vs. Divine Design. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 39 (3):389-395.
John Jefferson Davis (1987). The Design Argument, Cosmic “Fine Tuning,” and the Anthropic Principle. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 22 (3):139 - 150.
Nick Bostrom (2000). Observer-Relative Chances in Anthropic Reasoning? Erkenntnis 52 (1):93-108.
Troy Nunley (2010). Fishnets, Firing Squads, and Fine-Tuning (Again): How Likelihood Arguments Undermine Elliot Sober's Weak Anthropic Principles. Philosophia Christi 12 (1):160 - 178.
Ernan McMullin (1993). Indifference Principle and Anthropic Principle in Cosmology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 24 (3):359-389.
Mark A. Walker & M. Milan (2006). Astrophysical Fine Tuning, Naturalism, and the Contemporary Design Argument. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 20 (3):285 – 307.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-09-02Total downloads8 ( #123,092 of 549,087 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,317 of 549,087 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
