Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
350,910
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 74:
Line 74: − − ==Criticisms of the Anthropic Principle== − − In his web-page on [http://www.anthropic-principle.com/ The Anthropic Principle], the [[Transhumanism|transhumanist]] philosopher [[Nick Bostrom]] suggests that the Anthropic principle is only one manifestation of a much larger theory concerning self-location and observation. Within this he argues that the stronger versions of anthropic principles are simply confused, and while the weaker versions might be sound, they are in fact too weak to be useful. He argues that the current formulations of the principles are not formulated in any way as to yield observational consequences.
no edit summary
The anthropic principle is commonly interpreted as evidence of an [[intelligent design]]er. Physicist Robin Collins said, "The extraordinary fine-tuning of the laws and constants of nature, their beauty, their discoverability, their intelligibility - all of this combines to make the God hypothesis the most reasonable choice we have. All other theories come short." <ref>Lee Strobel, ''The Case for a Creator'', Zondervan 2004</ref> However, this is only evidence for ID if the strong/final versions of the anthropic principle are accepted, since the weak version makes sense without needing an intelligent designer.
The anthropic principle is commonly interpreted as evidence of an [[intelligent design]]er. Physicist Robin Collins said, "The extraordinary fine-tuning of the laws and constants of nature, their beauty, their discoverability, their intelligibility - all of this combines to make the God hypothesis the most reasonable choice we have. All other theories come short." <ref>Lee Strobel, ''The Case for a Creator'', Zondervan 2004</ref> However, this is only evidence for ID if the strong/final versions of the anthropic principle are accepted, since the weak version makes sense without needing an intelligent designer.
== See also ==
== See also ==