The design argument

Debating Design: From Darwin to DNA

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 98-129

  Sober, Elliott ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84925613371     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511804823.007     Document Type: Chapter

References (45)

1. Arbuthnot, J. 1710. An argument for Divine Providence, taken from the constant regularity observ'd in the births of both sexes. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 27: 186-90.
2. Barrow, J. 1988. The World within the World. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
3. Behe, M. 1996. Darwin's Black Box. New York: The Free Press.
4. Carter, B. 1974. Large number coincidences and the anthropic principle in cosmology. In Confrontation of Cosmological Theories with Observational Data, ed. M. S. Longair. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 291-8.
5. Darwin, C. [1859] 1964. On the Origin of Species. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6. Dawkins, R. 1986. The Blind Watchmaker. New York: Norton.
7. Dembski, W. 1998. The Design Inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8. Dennett, D. 1987a. Intentional systems in cognitive ethology: The “Panglossian Paradigm” defended. In his The Intentional Stance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 237-86.
9. Dennett, D. 1987.b. True believers. In his The Intentional Stance. Cambridge, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 13-42.
10. Dick, S. 1996. The Biological Universe: The Twentieth-Century Extraterrestrial Life Debate and the Limits of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Earman, J. 1987. The SAP also rises: A critical examination of the anthropic principle. American Philosophical Quarterly 24: 307-17.
12. Eddington, A. 1939. The Philosophy of Physical Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Edwards, A. 1972. Likelihood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Fisher, R. 1930. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. New York: Dover.
15. Fitelson, B., C. Stephens, and E. Sober. 1999. How not to detect design: A review of W. Dembski's The Design Inference. Philosophy of Science 66: 472-488. Also available at
16. Forster, M. and E. Sober. 2003. Why likelihood? In The Nature of Scientific Evidence, ed. M. Taper and S. Lee. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Also available at .
17. Gould, S. 1980. The Panda's Thumb. New Ybrk: Norton.
18. Hacking, I. 1965. The Logic of Statistical Inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19. Hacking, I. 1987. The inverse gambler's fallacy: The argument from design. The anthropic principle applied to Wheeler universes. Mind 96: 331-40.
20. Hempel, C. 1965. Studies in the logic of confirmation. In his Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy ofScience. New York: The Free Press, pp. 3-46.
21. Hume, D. [1779] 1990. Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. London: Penguin.
22. Keynes, J. 1921. A Treatise on Probability. London: Macmillan.
23. Kyburg, H. 1961. Probability and the Logic ofRational Belief. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
24. Leslie, J. 1989. Universes. London: Routledge.
25. Madden, E. and P. Hare. 1968. Evil and the Concept of God. Springfield, MA: Charles Thomas.
26. McMullin, E. 1993. Indifference principle and anthropic principle in cosmology. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 24: 359-89.
27. Paley, W. 1802. Natural Theology, or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity, Collected from the Appearances of Nature. London: Rivington.
28. Plantinga, A. 1974. The Nature ofNecessity. New York: Oxford.
29. Plantinga, A. 1979. The probabilistic argument from evil. Philosophical Studies 35: 1-53.
30. Rowe, W. 1979. The problem of evil and some varieties of atheism. American Philosophical Quarterly 16: 335-41.
31. Royall, R. 1997. Statistical Evidence: A Likelihood Paradigm. London: Chapman and Hall.
32. Sober, E. 1993. Philosophy of Biology. Boulder, CO.: Westview Press.
33. Sober, E. 1999. Testability. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 73: 47-76. Also available at .
34. Sober, E. 2000a. Evolution and the problem of other minds. Journal of Philosophyf 97: 365-86.
35. Sober, E. 2000b. Quine's two dogmas. Proceedings of the Aristotlean Society supp. vol. 74: 237-80.
36. Sober, E. 2002. Bayesianism: Its scope and limits. In Bayesianism, ed. R. Swinburne. London: British Academy, pp. 21-38. Also available at .
37. Sorensen, R. 1988. Blindspots. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
38. Stigler, S. 1986. The History of Statistics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
39. Swinburne, R. 1968. The argument from design. Philosophy 43: 199-212.
40. Swinburne, R. 1990a. Argument from the fine-tuning of the universe. In Physical Cosmology and Philosophy, ed. J. Leslie. New York: Macmillan, pp. 160-79.
41. Swinburne, R. 1990b. The limits of explanation. In Explanation and Its Limits, ed. D. Knowles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 177-93.
42. Turing, A. 1950. Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 59: 433-60.
43. Van Inwagen, P. 1993. Metaphysics. Boulder, CO.: Westview Press.
44. Venn, J. 1866. The Logic of Chance. New York: Chelsea.
45. White, R. 2000. Fine-tuning and multiple universes. Nous 34: 260-76.