The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science Advance Access published online on October 18, 2005
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, doi:10.1093/bjps/axi139
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 Department of Philosophy, Rutgers University, 26 Nichol Ave., New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Elliott Sober has recently argued that the cosmological design argument is unsound, since our observation of cosmic fine-tuning is subject to an observation selection effect (OSE). I argue that this view commits Sober to rejecting patently correct design inferences in more mundane scenarios. I show that Sober's view, that there are OSEs in those mundane cases, rests on a confusion about what information an agent ought to treat as background when evaluating likelihoods. Applying this analysis to the design argument shows that our observation of fine-tuning is not rendered uninformative by an OSE. 1 Design and the Anthropic Objection 2 Previous responses to the Anthropic Objection 3 Variations: experimental squads and survivor reunions 4 Why there is no OSE in firing squad cases 5 Application to the design argument
Article
Firing Squads and Fine-Tuning: Sober on the Design Argument
Jonathan Weisberg, E-mail: jweisber{at}rci.rutgers.edu
![]()
Abstract ![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?