An empirical critique of two versions of the doomsday argument – Gott's line and Leslie's wedge

Synthese 135 (3):415 - 430 (2003)
I discuss two versions of the doomsday argument. According to ``Gott's Line'',the fact that the human race has existed for 200,000 years licences the predictionthat it will last between 5100 and 7.8 million more years. According to ``Leslie'sWedge'', the fact that I currently exist is evidence that increases the plausibilityof the hypothesis that the human race will come to an end sooner rather than later.Both arguments rest on substantive assumptions about the sampling process thatunderlies our observations. These sampling assumptions have testable consequences,and so the sampling assumptions themselves must be regarded as empirical claims.The result of testing some of these consequences is that both doomsday argumentsare empirically disconfirmed.
Keywords Philosophy   Philosophy   Epistemology   Logic   Metaphysics   Philosophy of Language
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2004
DOI 10.1023/A:1023545820214
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 30,694
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
The Quantum Doomsday Argument.Alastair Wilson - 2017 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 68 (2).
How to Predict Future Duration From Present Age.Monton Bradley & Kierland Brian - 2006 - Philosophical Quarterly 56 (222):16-38.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Added to PP index

Total downloads
61 ( #89,133 of 2,197,231 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #298,964 of 2,197,231 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature