Biology and Philosophy 11 (4):519-534 (1996)

Authors
Graham Oppy
Monash University
Abstract
There seems to be a widespread conviction — evidenced, for example, in the work of Mackie, Dawkins and Sober — that it is Darwinian rather than Humean considerations which deal the fatal logical blow to arguments for intelligent design. I argue that this conviction cannot be well-founded. If there are current logically decisive objections to design arguments, they must be Humean — for Darwinian considerations count not at all against design arguments based upon apparent cosmological fine-tuning. I argue, further, that there are good Humean reasons for atheists and agnostics to resist the suggestion that apparent design — apparent biological design and/or apparent cosmological fine-tuning — establishes (or even strongly supports) the hypothesis of intelligent design.
Keywords Hume  Darwin  Dawkins  Sober  Mackie  Penrose  argument for design  biological design  cosmological fine-tuning  world ensemble  chance
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/BF00138330
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
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

Universes.John Leslie - 1989 - Routledge.
Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion.David Hume - 1779/1998 - In Elizabeth Schmidt Radcliffe, Richard McCarty, Fritz Allhoff & Anand Vaidya (eds.), Philosophical Review. Blackwell. pp. 338-339.

View all 10 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Paley’s Design Argument as an Inference to the Best Explanation, or, Dawkins’ Dilemma.Sander Gliboff - 2000 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 31 (4):579-597.
Design and its Discontents.Bruce H. Weber - 2011 - Synthese 178 (2):271 - 289.
Design and its Discontents.Bruce H. Weber - 2011 - Synthese 178 (2):271-289.
Hume E o Argumento Do Desígnio.Marcos Rodrigues da Silva - 2006 - Kriterion: Journal of Philosophy 47 (113).

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Firing Squads and Fine-Tuning: Sober on the Design Argument.Jonathan Weisberg - 2005 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (4):809-821.
Design and its Discontents.Bruce H. Weber - 2011 - Synthese 178 (2):271 - 289.
A User's Guide to Design Arguments.Trent Dougherty & Ted Poston - 2008 - Religious Studies 44 (1):99-110.
The Fine-Tuning Argument.Neil A. Manson - 2009 - Philosophy Compass 4 (1):271-286.
Astrophysical Fine Tuning, Naturalism, and the Contemporary Design Argument.Mark A. Walker & M. Milan - 2006 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 20 (3):285 – 307.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
203 ( #53,046 of 2,461,989 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
17 ( #45,327 of 2,461,989 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes