Religious Studies 36 (2):163-176 (2000)
AbstractThe design argument for the existence of God is often criticized for resting on anthropocentrism. Some critics maintain that anthropocentrism explains the origin of the design argument. Such critics commit the genetic fallacy. Others say anthropocentrism explains the appeal of the belief that human beings are ends especially worthy of creation. They fail to appreciate that the design argument need not be framed in terms of the fitness of the universe for humanity. Lastly, some say the design argument requires a picture of value according to which it was true, prior to the coming-into-being of the universe, that our sort of universe is worthy of creation. Such a picture, they say, is mistaken, though our attraction to it can be explained in terms of anthropocentrism. This is a serious criticism. To respond to it, proponents of the design argument must either defend an objectivist conception of value or, if not, provide some independent reason for thinking an intelligent designer is likely to create our sort of universe
Similar books and articles
What fine-tuning's got to do with it: a reply to Weisberg.R. White - 2011 - Analysis 71 (4):676-679.
The design argument.Elliott Sober - 2004 - In William Mann (ed.), The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Religion. Blackwell.
Anthropic reasoning and the contemporary design argument in astrophysics: A reply to Robert Klee.Mark Walker & Milan M. Cirkovic - unknown
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Fine-Tuning, Multiple Universes, and the 'This Universe' Objection.Neil Manson - 2003 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 84 (1):67 - 83.
Leibniz's Best World Claim Restructured.William C. Lane - 2010 - American Philosophical Quarterly 47 (1):57-84.
References found in this work
What Is the Explanandum of the Anthropic Principle?Patrick A. Wilson - 1991 - American Philosophical Quarterly 28 (2):167 - 173.