Authors
Stephen Grover
Queens College (CUNY)
Abstract
This paper characterizes various responses to the question, 'Why does our universe exist?' Some responses- that the question is senseless, that the existence of our universe is logically necessary- are implausible. Adjudication between more plausible responses requires us to evaluate the argument from the 'fine-tuning' of the universe, a refurbished version of the argument from design that appeals to cosmology rather than biology. The evidence of fine-tuning should lead us to adopt, albeit provisionally, cosmological fecundity, the hypothesis that there exist many universes of varying characters. The existence of our universe is thereby rendered less surprising. This is to be preferred both to the theistic hypothesis and to the view that the existence of our universe requires no explanation.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1080/002017498321779
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,740
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

On the Plurality of Worlds.David Lewis - 1986 - Wiley-Blackwell.
Philosophical Explanations.Robert Nozick - 1981 - Harvard University Press.
The Nature of Necessity.Alvin Plantinga - 1974 - Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
On the Plurality of Worlds.David Lewis - 1986 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 178 (3):388-390.
The Anthropic Cosmological Principle.John D. Barrow - 1986 - Oxford University Press.

View all 38 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

A Fatal Logical Flaw in Anthropic Principle Design Arguments.Gilbert Fulmer - 2001 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 49 (2):101-110.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Two Types of Cosmological Views.[author unknown] - 1977 - Contemporary Chinese Thought 9 (1):17-35.
Cosmological Arguments.Graham Oppy - 2009 - Noûs 43 (1):31-48.
Cosmological Arguments.Michael Almeida - 2018 - Cambridge University Press.
The Fecundity of Exile.Albert Memmi - 2011 - Journal of French and Francophone Philosophy 19 (2):4-6.
Closed Systems, Explanations, and the Cosmological Argument.Kevin Davey & Mark Lippelmann - 2007 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 62 (2):89 - 101.
Introduction to Gilles Deleuze’s Cosmological Sensibility.Alain Beaulieu - 2016 - Философия И Космология 16 (1):199-210.
Explanation and the Cosmological Argument.Bruce Reichenbach - 2004 - In Michael Peterson & Raymond vanArragon (eds.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Religion. London: Blackwell. pp. 97-114.
A New Cosmological Argument Undone.Michael J. Almeida & Neal D. Judisch - 2002 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 51 (1):55-64.
The Cosmological Argument.William L. Rowe - 1971 - Noûs 5 (1):49-61.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
290 ( #33,937 of 2,462,834 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,387 of 2,462,834 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes