The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe

Abstract The Doomsday argument purports to show that the risk of the human species going extinct soon has been systematically underestimated. This argument has something in common with controversial forms of reasoning in other areas, including: game theoretic problems with imperfect recall, the meth...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Bostrom, Nick [verfasserIn]

Format:	Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2001

Schlagwörter:	Thought Experiment Prima Facie Common Denominator Theoretic Problem Human Species

Anmerkung:	© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: Synthese - Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936, 127(2001), 3 vom: Juni, Seite 359-387
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:127 ; year:2001 ; number:3 ; month:06 ; pages:359-387

Links:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1023/A:1010350925053

Katalog-ID:	OLC2037230567

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	OLC2037230567
003	DE-627
005	20230504054432.0
007	tu
008	200819s2001 xx \|\|\|\|\| 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1023/A:1010350925053 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)OLC2037230567
035			\|a (DE-He213)A:1010350925053-p
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
082	0	4	\|a 400 \|a 150 \|a 300 \|q VZ
084			\|a 5,2 \|a 7,11 \|a 11 \|a 5,1 \|2 ssgn
084			\|a LING \|q DE-30 \|2 fid
100	1		\|a Bostrom, Nick \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe
264		1	\|c 2001
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen \|b n \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Band \|b nc \|2 rdacarrier
500			\|a © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001
520			\|a Abstract The Doomsday argument purports to show that the risk of the human species going extinct soon has been systematically underestimated. This argument has something in common with controversial forms of reasoning in other areas, including: game theoretic problems with imperfect recall, the methodology of cosmology, the epistemology of indexical belief, and the debate over so-called fine-tuning arguments for the design hypothesis. The common denominator is a certain premiss: the Self-Sampling Assumption. We present two strands of argument in favor of this assumption. Through a series of thought experiments we then investigate some bizarre prima facie consequences – backward causation, psychic powers, and an apparent conflict with the Principal Principle.
650		4	\|a Thought Experiment
650		4	\|a Prima Facie
650		4	\|a Common Denominator
650		4	\|a Theoretic Problem
650		4	\|a Human Species
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t Synthese \|d Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936 \|g 127(2001), 3 vom: Juni, Seite 359-387 \|w (DE-627)129479187 \|w (DE-600)204075-X \|w (DE-576)014860856 \|x 0039-7857 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:127 \|g year:2001 \|g number:3 \|g month:06 \|g pages:359-387
856	4	1	\|u https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010350925053 \|z lizenzpflichtig \|3 Volltext
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_OLC
912			\|a FID-LING
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHY
912			\|a SSG-OLC-CHE
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHI
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_21
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_72
912			\|a GBV_ILN_130
912			\|a GBV_ILN_702
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2006
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2007
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2010
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2011
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2190
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2410
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4027
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4028
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4046
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4082
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4193
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4310
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4318
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 127 \|j 2001 \|e 3 \|c 06 \|h 359-387

Indexfelder

author_variant	n b nb
matchkey_str	article:00397857:2001----::hdosaagmnaaeenn
hierarchy_sort_str	2001
publishDate	2001
allfields	10.1023/A:1010350925053 doi (DE-627)OLC2037230567 (DE-He213)A:1010350925053-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 150 300 VZ 5,2 7,11 11 5,1 ssgn LING DE-30 fid Bostrom, Nick verfasserin aut The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe 2001 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001 Abstract The Doomsday argument purports to show that the risk of the human species going extinct soon has been systematically underestimated. This argument has something in common with controversial forms of reasoning in other areas, including: game theoretic problems with imperfect recall, the methodology of cosmology, the epistemology of indexical belief, and the debate over so-called fine-tuning arguments for the design hypothesis. The common denominator is a certain premiss: the Self-Sampling Assumption. We present two strands of argument in favor of this assumption. Through a series of thought experiments we then investigate some bizarre prima facie consequences – backward causation, psychic powers, and an apparent conflict with the Principal Principle. Thought Experiment Prima Facie Common Denominator Theoretic Problem Human Species Enthalten in Synthese Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936 127(2001), 3 vom: Juni, Seite 359-387 (DE-627)129479187 (DE-600)204075-X (DE-576)014860856 0039-7857 nnns volume:127 year:2001 number:3 month:06 pages:359-387 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010350925053 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_130 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2410 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4028 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4193 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4310 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 AR 127 2001 3 06 359-387
spelling	10.1023/A:1010350925053 doi (DE-627)OLC2037230567 (DE-He213)A:1010350925053-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 150 300 VZ 5,2 7,11 11 5,1 ssgn LING DE-30 fid Bostrom, Nick verfasserin aut The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe 2001 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001 Abstract The Doomsday argument purports to show that the risk of the human species going extinct soon has been systematically underestimated. This argument has something in common with controversial forms of reasoning in other areas, including: game theoretic problems with imperfect recall, the methodology of cosmology, the epistemology of indexical belief, and the debate over so-called fine-tuning arguments for the design hypothesis. The common denominator is a certain premiss: the Self-Sampling Assumption. We present two strands of argument in favor of this assumption. Through a series of thought experiments we then investigate some bizarre prima facie consequences – backward causation, psychic powers, and an apparent conflict with the Principal Principle. Thought Experiment Prima Facie Common Denominator Theoretic Problem Human Species Enthalten in Synthese Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936 127(2001), 3 vom: Juni, Seite 359-387 (DE-627)129479187 (DE-600)204075-X (DE-576)014860856 0039-7857 nnns volume:127 year:2001 number:3 month:06 pages:359-387 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010350925053 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_130 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2410 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4028 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4193 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4310 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 AR 127 2001 3 06 359-387
allfields_unstemmed	10.1023/A:1010350925053 doi (DE-627)OLC2037230567 (DE-He213)A:1010350925053-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 150 300 VZ 5,2 7,11 11 5,1 ssgn LING DE-30 fid Bostrom, Nick verfasserin aut The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe 2001 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001 Abstract The Doomsday argument purports to show that the risk of the human species going extinct soon has been systematically underestimated. This argument has something in common with controversial forms of reasoning in other areas, including: game theoretic problems with imperfect recall, the methodology of cosmology, the epistemology of indexical belief, and the debate over so-called fine-tuning arguments for the design hypothesis. The common denominator is a certain premiss: the Self-Sampling Assumption. We present two strands of argument in favor of this assumption. Through a series of thought experiments we then investigate some bizarre prima facie consequences – backward causation, psychic powers, and an apparent conflict with the Principal Principle. Thought Experiment Prima Facie Common Denominator Theoretic Problem Human Species Enthalten in Synthese Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936 127(2001), 3 vom: Juni, Seite 359-387 (DE-627)129479187 (DE-600)204075-X (DE-576)014860856 0039-7857 nnns volume:127 year:2001 number:3 month:06 pages:359-387 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010350925053 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_130 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2410 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4028 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4193 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4310 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 AR 127 2001 3 06 359-387
allfieldsGer	10.1023/A:1010350925053 doi (DE-627)OLC2037230567 (DE-He213)A:1010350925053-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 150 300 VZ 5,2 7,11 11 5,1 ssgn LING DE-30 fid Bostrom, Nick verfasserin aut The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe 2001 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001 Abstract The Doomsday argument purports to show that the risk of the human species going extinct soon has been systematically underestimated. This argument has something in common with controversial forms of reasoning in other areas, including: game theoretic problems with imperfect recall, the methodology of cosmology, the epistemology of indexical belief, and the debate over so-called fine-tuning arguments for the design hypothesis. The common denominator is a certain premiss: the Self-Sampling Assumption. We present two strands of argument in favor of this assumption. Through a series of thought experiments we then investigate some bizarre prima facie consequences – backward causation, psychic powers, and an apparent conflict with the Principal Principle. Thought Experiment Prima Facie Common Denominator Theoretic Problem Human Species Enthalten in Synthese Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936 127(2001), 3 vom: Juni, Seite 359-387 (DE-627)129479187 (DE-600)204075-X (DE-576)014860856 0039-7857 nnns volume:127 year:2001 number:3 month:06 pages:359-387 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010350925053 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_130 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2410 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4028 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4193 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4310 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 AR 127 2001 3 06 359-387
allfieldsSound	10.1023/A:1010350925053 doi (DE-627)OLC2037230567 (DE-He213)A:1010350925053-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 150 300 VZ 5,2 7,11 11 5,1 ssgn LING DE-30 fid Bostrom, Nick verfasserin aut The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe 2001 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001 Abstract The Doomsday argument purports to show that the risk of the human species going extinct soon has been systematically underestimated. This argument has something in common with controversial forms of reasoning in other areas, including: game theoretic problems with imperfect recall, the methodology of cosmology, the epistemology of indexical belief, and the debate over so-called fine-tuning arguments for the design hypothesis. The common denominator is a certain premiss: the Self-Sampling Assumption. We present two strands of argument in favor of this assumption. Through a series of thought experiments we then investigate some bizarre prima facie consequences – backward causation, psychic powers, and an apparent conflict with the Principal Principle. Thought Experiment Prima Facie Common Denominator Theoretic Problem Human Species Enthalten in Synthese Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936 127(2001), 3 vom: Juni, Seite 359-387 (DE-627)129479187 (DE-600)204075-X (DE-576)014860856 0039-7857 nnns volume:127 year:2001 number:3 month:06 pages:359-387 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010350925053 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_130 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2410 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4028 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4193 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4310 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 AR 127 2001 3 06 359-387
language	English
source	Enthalten in Synthese 127(2001), 3 vom: Juni, Seite 359-387 volume:127 year:2001 number:3 month:06 pages:359-387
sourceStr	Enthalten in Synthese 127(2001), 3 vom: Juni, Seite 359-387 volume:127 year:2001 number:3 month:06 pages:359-387
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Thought Experiment Prima Facie Common Denominator Theoretic Problem Human Species
dewey-raw	400
isfreeaccess_bool	false
container_title	Synthese
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Bostrom, Nick @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2001-06-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	129479187
dewey-sort	3400
id	OLC2037230567
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2037230567</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230504054432.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200819s2001 xx \|\|\|\|\| 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1023/A:1010350925053</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2037230567</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)A:1010350925053-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">400</subfield><subfield code="a">150</subfield><subfield code="a">300</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">5,2</subfield><subfield code="a">7,11</subfield><subfield code="a">11</subfield><subfield code="a">5,1</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">LING</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-30</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bostrom, Nick</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract The Doomsday argument purports to show that the risk of the human species going extinct soon has been systematically underestimated. This argument has something in common with controversial forms of reasoning in other areas, including: game theoretic problems with imperfect recall, the methodology of cosmology, the epistemology of indexical belief, and the debate over so-called fine-tuning arguments for the design hypothesis. The common denominator is a certain premiss: the Self-Sampling Assumption. We present two strands of argument in favor of this assumption. Through a series of thought experiments we then investigate some bizarre prima facie consequences – backward causation, psychic powers, and an apparent conflict with the Principal Principle.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Thought Experiment</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Prima Facie</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Common Denominator</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Theoretic Problem</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Human Species</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Synthese</subfield><subfield code="d">Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936</subfield><subfield code="g">127(2001), 3 vom: Juni, Seite 359-387</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129479187</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)204075-X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)014860856</subfield><subfield code="x">0039-7857</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:127</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2001</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">month:06</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:359-387</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010350925053</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-LING</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHY</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-CHE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHI</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_21</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_72</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_130</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2410</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4028</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4082</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4193</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4310</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4318</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">127</subfield><subfield code="j">2001</subfield><subfield code="e">3</subfield><subfield code="c">06</subfield><subfield code="h">359-387</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Bostrom, Nick
spellingShingle	Bostrom, Nick ddc 400 ssgn 5,2 fid LING misc Thought Experiment misc Prima Facie misc Common Denominator misc Theoretic Problem misc Human Species The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe
authorStr	Bostrom, Nick
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)129479187
format	Article
dewey-ones	400 - Language 150 - Psychology 300 - Social sciences
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut
collection	OLC
remote_str	false
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	0039-7857
topic_title	400 150 300 VZ 5,2 7,11 11 5,1 ssgn LING DE-30 fid The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe Thought Experiment Prima Facie Common Denominator Theoretic Problem Human Species
topic	ddc 400 ssgn 5,2 fid LING misc Thought Experiment misc Prima Facie misc Common Denominator misc Theoretic Problem misc Human Species
topic_unstemmed	ddc 400 ssgn 5,2 fid LING misc Thought Experiment misc Prima Facie misc Common Denominator misc Theoretic Problem misc Human Species
topic_browse	ddc 400 ssgn 5,2 fid LING misc Thought Experiment misc Prima Facie misc Common Denominator misc Theoretic Problem misc Human Species
format_facet	Aufsätze Gedruckte Aufsätze
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	nc
hierarchy_parent_title	Synthese
hierarchy_parent_id	129479187
dewey-tens	400 - Language 150 - Psychology 300 - Social sciences, sociology & anthropology
hierarchy_top_title	Synthese
isfreeaccess_txt	false
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)129479187 (DE-600)204075-X (DE-576)014860856
title	The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe
ctrlnum	(DE-627)OLC2037230567 (DE-He213)A:1010350925053-p
title_full	The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe
author_sort	Bostrom, Nick
journal	Synthese
journalStr	Synthese
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	false
dewey-hundreds	400 - Language 100 - Philosophy & psychology 300 - Social sciences
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2001
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	359
author_browse	Bostrom, Nick
container_volume	127
class	400 150 300 VZ 5,2 7,11 11 5,1 ssgn LING DE-30 fid
format_se	Aufsätze
author-letter	Bostrom, Nick
doi_str_mv	10.1023/A:1010350925053
dewey-full	400 150 300
title_sort	the doomsday argument adam & eve, $ un^{++} $, and quantum joe
title_auth	The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe
abstract	Abstract The Doomsday argument purports to show that the risk of the human species going extinct soon has been systematically underestimated. This argument has something in common with controversial forms of reasoning in other areas, including: game theoretic problems with imperfect recall, the methodology of cosmology, the epistemology of indexical belief, and the debate over so-called fine-tuning arguments for the design hypothesis. The common denominator is a certain premiss: the Self-Sampling Assumption. We present two strands of argument in favor of this assumption. Through a series of thought experiments we then investigate some bizarre prima facie consequences – backward causation, psychic powers, and an apparent conflict with the Principal Principle. © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001
abstractGer	Abstract The Doomsday argument purports to show that the risk of the human species going extinct soon has been systematically underestimated. This argument has something in common with controversial forms of reasoning in other areas, including: game theoretic problems with imperfect recall, the methodology of cosmology, the epistemology of indexical belief, and the debate over so-called fine-tuning arguments for the design hypothesis. The common denominator is a certain premiss: the Self-Sampling Assumption. We present two strands of argument in favor of this assumption. Through a series of thought experiments we then investigate some bizarre prima facie consequences – backward causation, psychic powers, and an apparent conflict with the Principal Principle. © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001
abstract_unstemmed	Abstract The Doomsday argument purports to show that the risk of the human species going extinct soon has been systematically underestimated. This argument has something in common with controversial forms of reasoning in other areas, including: game theoretic problems with imperfect recall, the methodology of cosmology, the epistemology of indexical belief, and the debate over so-called fine-tuning arguments for the design hypothesis. The common denominator is a certain premiss: the Self-Sampling Assumption. We present two strands of argument in favor of this assumption. Through a series of thought experiments we then investigate some bizarre prima facie consequences – backward causation, psychic powers, and an apparent conflict with the Principal Principle. © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_130 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2410 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4028 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4193 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4310 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325
container_issue	3
title_short	The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe
url	https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010350925053
remote_bool	false
ppnlink	129479187
mediatype_str_mv	n
isOA_txt	false
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1023/A:1010350925053
up_date	2024-07-03T14:21:04.131Z
_version_	1803567983897870336
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2037230567</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230504054432.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200819s2001 xx \|\|\|\|\| 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1023/A:1010350925053</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2037230567</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)A:1010350925053-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">400</subfield><subfield code="a">150</subfield><subfield code="a">300</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">5,2</subfield><subfield code="a">7,11</subfield><subfield code="a">11</subfield><subfield code="a">5,1</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">LING</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-30</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bostrom, Nick</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract The Doomsday argument purports to show that the risk of the human species going extinct soon has been systematically underestimated. This argument has something in common with controversial forms of reasoning in other areas, including: game theoretic problems with imperfect recall, the methodology of cosmology, the epistemology of indexical belief, and the debate over so-called fine-tuning arguments for the design hypothesis. The common denominator is a certain premiss: the Self-Sampling Assumption. We present two strands of argument in favor of this assumption. Through a series of thought experiments we then investigate some bizarre prima facie consequences – backward causation, psychic powers, and an apparent conflict with the Principal Principle.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Thought Experiment</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Prima Facie</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Common Denominator</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Theoretic Problem</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Human Species</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Synthese</subfield><subfield code="d">Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936</subfield><subfield code="g">127(2001), 3 vom: Juni, Seite 359-387</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129479187</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)204075-X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)014860856</subfield><subfield code="x">0039-7857</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:127</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2001</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3</subfield><subfield code="g">month:06</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:359-387</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010350925053</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-LING</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHY</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-CHE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHI</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_21</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_72</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_130</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2410</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4028</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4082</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4193</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4310</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4318</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">127</subfield><subfield code="j">2001</subfield><subfield code="e">3</subfield><subfield code="c">06</subfield><subfield code="h">359-387</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.4016743

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

The Doomsday Argument Adam & Eve, $ UN^{++} $, and Quantum Joe

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?