Do doomsday's proponents think we were born yesterday?

Philosophy 76 (3):443-450 (2001)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In a recent article, John Leslie has defended the intriguing Carter-Leslie ‘Doomsday Argument’ (Philosophy, January 2000). I argue that an essential presupposition of the argument—that ‘the case of one's name coming out of [an] urn is sufficiently similar to the case of being born into the world’—engenders, in turn, a parallel ‘Ussherian Corollary’. The dubiousness of this Corollary, coupled with independent considerations, casts doubt upon the Carter-Leslie presupposition, and hence, dooms the Doomsday argument.

Other Versions

No versions found

Similar books and articles

The doomsday argument.Nick Bostrom - 2008 - Think 6 (17-18):23-28.
A Third Route to the Doomsday Argument.Paul Franceschi - 2002 - Journal of Philosophical Research 34:263-278.
The doomsday argument without knowledge of birth rank.Bradley Monton - 2003 - Philosophical Quarterly 53 (210):79–82.
The Doomsday Argument and Hempel's Problem.Paul Franceschi - 1999 - [Journal (on-Line/Unpaginated)] 29 (1):139-156.
The doomsday argument and the number of possible observers.Ken D. Olum - 2002 - Philosophical Quarterly 52 (207):164-184.
Apocalypse Not Just Now.Mark Greenberg - 1999 - London Review of Books 21 (13):19-22.
Testing the Doomsday Argument.John Leslie - 1994 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 11 (1):31-44.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
137 (#320,651)

6 months
26 (#386,251)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

A Third Route to the Doomsday Argument.Paul Franceschi - 2009 - Journal of Philosophical Research 34:263-278.
A Third Route to the Doomsday Argument.Paul Franceschi - 2002 - Journal of Philosophical Research 34:263-278.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references