The Boltzmann Brains Puzzle

Noûs 57 (4):958-972 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Leading cosmological theories engender a controversial puzzle which has prompted philosophers to propose competing epistemological solutions and physicists to propose methodological changes to cosmology. The puzzle arises from the prediction that every brain on Earth will eventually be vastly outnumbered by physical duplicates formed by random collisions of particles in outer space. Supposing that this prediction is correct, shouldn't you believe that your brain is probably one of these vastly more typical extraterrestrial brains, since you cannot infer your brain's origin from your experiential state? But supposing that your brain is one of these extraterrestrial brains, why be confident in the cosmological theories, since you never actually received testimony supporting these theories? Proposals in the literature either deny the rationality of believing theories that make the prediction or deny the typicality of your brain among its duplicates. This paper argues that these proposals are not entirely satisfactory. Instead, one should be confident in theories making the prediction on the supposition that your brain is one of the extraterrestrial brains. The upshots include that it may be rational to believe that your brain is probably an extraterrestrial brain and that cosmologists should not alter their methodology in response to the puzzle.

Similar books and articles

Does my total evidence support that I’m a Boltzmann Brain?Sinan Dogramaci - 2020 - Philosophical Studies 177 (12):3717-3723.
Part I. Are Boltzmann Brains Bad?: Why Boltzmann Brains are bad.Sean M. Carroll - 2020 - In Shamik Dasgupta, Brad Weslake & Ravit Dotan (eds.), Current Controversies in Philosophy of Science. London: Routledge.
That solution to Prior’s puzzle.Hüseyin Güngör - 2022 - Philosophical Studies 179 (9):2765-2785.
A Puzzle about Logical Analysis.Stefan Rinner - 2021 - Philosophia 50 (2):691-698.
Why Boltzmann Brains Are Bad.Sean M. Carroll - 2020 - In Shamik Dasgupta, Brad Weslake & Ravit Dotan (eds.), Current Controversies in Philosophy of Science. London: Routledge. pp. 7-20.
De Se Puzzles and Frege Puzzles.Stephan Torre & Clas Weber - 2022 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 65 (1):50-76.
Frege’s Puzzle and Semantic Relationism.Surajit Barua - 2019 - Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research 36 (1):197-210.
Mates and the hierarchy.Marion Durand & Gurpreet Rattan - 2022 - Synthese 200 (6):1-24.
Shadows of constitution.István Aranyosi - 2007 - The Monist 90 (3):415-431.
A Puzzle about Warrant.Duncan Pritchard - 2001 - Philosophical Inquiry 23 (1-2):59-71.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-01-05

Downloads
310 (#65,567)

6 months
189 (#15,173)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Ron Avni
University of Texas at Austin

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Knowledge and its limits.Timothy Williamson - 2000 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Knowledge and Its Limits.Timothy Williamson - 2000 - Philosophy 76 (297):460-464.
Knowledge and its Limits.Timothy Williamson - 2000 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 64 (1):200-201.
Time and chance.David Z. Albert - 2000 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Knowing One’s Own Mind.Donald Davidson - 1987 - Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 60 (3):441-458.

View all 13 references / Add more references