Firing Squads and Fine-Tuning
Sober on the Design Argument
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8399531 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jonathan Weisberg (0000-0001-6697-1633, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2005 |
| Volume | 56 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 809-821 |
| Publication date | 2005-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0007-0882 • E-ISSN: 1464-3537 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1093/bjps/axi139 |
| OpenAlex | W2073436730 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 8 |
| References cited | 5 |
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
Anthropic principle · Argument (complex analysis) · Confusion · Epistemology · Psychoanalysis · Selection (genetic algorithm) · Subject (documents) · Teleological argument · Teleology · Artificial Intelligence · Computer Science · Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations · Philosophy · Psychology · Space Science and Extraterrestrial Life · Theology and Philosophy of Evil
The Design Argument
The Universe’s Fine-Tuning Does Call for Explanation
Four Problems About Self-Locating Belief
The Snow White problem
Piecewise versus Total Support
Where the Design Argument Goes Wrong
The Fermi paradox, Bayes’ rule, and existential risk management
Selection Biases in Likelihood Arguments
| Unique citing works | 8 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0.53 |
| Citation span | 2011 - 2025 (15) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 8 |