Thanks for all this info, and thanks for your feedback. I'm looking
forward to digging into all these references. I just wish I could spend 24
hours a day reading(well, maybe just 22). But I appreciate your help.
I agree with what you said about the effects of someone's prior beliefs
but I've been very challenged to take another look at the strength of the
ID argument given the present state of scientific research in these areas.
It will be good to have some other "pro-ID" references to check to
consider alongside the input I've gotten from people on this list. Thanks
again.
Randy Bronson
_____________________________________________________________________
| |
| ______ ______ _____ Randy Bronson, Manufacturing Tech |
| /\_____\/\_____\/\____\ TECH-SOURCE INC. |
| \/_ _/ / ____/\/_ _/ 442 S. North Lake Blvd. |
| / / // / /___ / / / Altamonte Springs, FL 32701 |
| / / /_\/___ /_/ / / TEL : 407-262-7100 |
| / / //\____/ /\_\/ /_\ FAX : 407-339-2554 |
| \/_/ \/_____/\/______/ EMAIL: randy@techsource.com |
| |
|_____________________________________________________________________|
On Mon, 2 Nov 1998, Brian D Harper wrote:
> At 08:14 AM 10/28/98 -0500, you wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >
> > I think I just need to do some more reading on the AP. My only source of
> >info at this point is the stuff I've read by Hugh Ross. Can you recommend
> >some more books? Which books are these Sciama quotes from?
>
>
> Sorry, about my delay, I've been very busy.
>
> The Sciama paper comes from the following collection:
>
> _The Anthropic Principle_, Proceedings
> of the Second Venice Conference on Cosmology and Philosophy,
> F. Bertola and U. Curi, ed., Cambridge University Press, 1993.
>
> This is an interesting volume with articles by several "big names",
> John Barrow, Brandon Carter, Hubert Reeves, Fred Hoyle.
> There is also a paper by George Coyne "Some Theological
> Reflections on the Anthropic Principle."
>
> My suggestion for a starting point though is another volume
> edited by John Leslie: <Physical Cosmology and Philosophy>,
> Macmillan, 1990.
>
> This volume contains a tremendous collection of articles,
> many of them classics, for example the original paper
> wherein Brandon Carter first introduced the Weak
> Anthropic Principle. Here's a list of the authors and there
> papers:
>
> =====<Physical Cosmology and Philosophy>=============
> 1. Ernan McMullin: Is Philosophy Relevant to Cosmology?
> 2. George Gamow: Modern Cosmology
> 3. W. B. Bonnor: Relativistic Theories of the Universe
> 4. H. Bondi: The Steady-State Theory of the Uniuerse
> 5. Martin Rees: The 13,000,000,000 Year Bang
> 6. Jayant Narlikar: Was There a Big Bang?
> 7. Adolf Grunbaum: The Pseudo-Problem of Creation in Physical
> Cosmology
> 8. G.F.R. Ellis: Cosmology and Verifiability
> 9. R.H. Dicke: Dirac's Cosmology and Mach's Principle
> 10. Brandon Carter: Large Number Coincidences and the Anthropic
> Principle in Cosmology
> 11. B.J. Carr: On the Origin, Evolution and Purpose of the
> Physical Universe
> 12. Richard Swinburne: Argument from the Fine-Tuning of the
> Universe
> 13. Heinz R. Pagels: A Cozy Cosmology
> 14. Stephen Jay Gould: Mind and Supermind
> 15. George Gale: Cosmological Fecundity: Theories of Multiple
> Universes
> 16. John Archibald Wheeler: Beyond the End of Time
> 17. Edward P. Tryon: Is the Universe a Vacuum Fluctuation?
> 18. Paul Davies: What Caused the Big Bang?
> 19. Andrei Linde: The Universe: Inflation Out Of Chaos
> 20. Robert Shapiro and Gerald Feinberg: Possible Forms of Life
> in Environments Very Different from Earth
> 21. Michael H. Hart: Atmospheric Evolution, the Drake Equation,
> and DNA: Sparse Life in an Infinite Universe
> ===============================================
>
> Closely related to current discussions would be #20 :-).
>
> I would also recommend another collection:
> <Evidence of Purpose>, J.M. Templeton, ed.,
> Continuum, 1994.
>
> This volume is not solely devoted to the AP. Those
> articles dealing with it would be from the TE
> perspective.
>
> I would also highly recommend John Leslie's book
> <Universes>, Routledge, 1989. New paper back
> edition: 1996.
>
> Leslie is a very interesting case. He is a recognized
> authority on the Anthropic Principle yet, apart from
> what the title of his book might suggest, he presents
> an argument for the existence of God based on fine-tuning.
> What makes this particularly interesting is that Leslie
> is not a Christian nor is a Theist in any form that most
> of us would recognize as such (he's a Neo platonist).
> This just illustrates how stereotypes so often break down
> when dealing with the AP. One gets the idea from some
> folks that only cosmology ignorant Christian apologists
> give the argument from design based on AP.
>
> Finally, Pim mentioned a few web pages devoted to the AP.
> I'll throw in a few more for balance:
>
> "The Prerequisites of Life in Our Universe."John Leslie
> http://www.leaderu.com/truth/3truth12.html
>
> "Design and the Anthropic Principle" by Hugh Ross
> http://mypage.direct.ca/g/gcramer/design.html
>
> "Introduction: The Resurrection of Theism" William Lane Craig
> http://www.origins.org/truth/3truth01.html
>
> "Cosmythology: Was the Universe Designed to Produce Us?"
> V.J. Stenger
> http://www.skeptic.com/04.2.stenger-cosmyth.html
>
> >>
> >> >Sciama:==
> >> >> (b) God regards me as such a desirable product of the universe
> >> >> that he has fine-tuned it so as to guarantee my development.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Randy:==
> >> > This seems like the best answer to me, although I don't know if it's the
> >> >best scientific answer.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Very good answer. I also like this answer best but am cautious
> >> about the scientific merit of the explanation.
> >>
> > Which raises a question for me. If this is indeed the best answer, but
> >it's not the best SCIENTIFIC answer, does that say anything about the need
> >for an integrated approach to truth-seeking?
> >
>
> I think an "integrated approach to truth seeking" is a very good
> idea. Which is the "best answer", though, is very subjective. Whatever
> arguments one might think of against (c) also apply to (b) and
> vice versa. By and large, I think a persons reaction to the
> AP will be in keeping with their prior beliefs. A Theist
> is likely to find it very convincing, an agnostic will likely find
> just enough room for doubt soas to continue in their agnosticism,
> an atheist will likely find overwhelming evidence for the existence of
> "other worlds" :).
>
> Brian Harper
> Associate Professor
> Applied Mechanics
> The Ohio State University
>
> "He who establishes his arguments
> by noise and command shows that
> reason is weak" -- Montaigne
>
>