Privileged, Typical, or not even that? – Our Place in the World According to the Copernican and the Cosmological Principles

Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 37 (2):225-256 (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

If we are to constrain our place in the world, two principles are often appealed to in science. According to the Copernican Principle, we do not occupy a privileged position within the Universe. The Cosmological Principle, on the other hand, says that our observations would roughly be the same, if we were located at any other place in the Universe. In our paper we analyze these principles from a logical and philosophical point of view. We show how they are related, how they can be supported and what use is made of them. Our main results are: 1. There is a logical gap between both principles insofar as the Cosmological Principle is significantly stronger than the Copernican Principle. 2. A step that is often taken for establishing the Cosmological Principle on the base of the Copernican Principle and observations is not incontestable as it stands, but can be supplemented with a different argument. 3. The Cosmological Principle might be crucial for cosmology to the extent it is not supported by empirical evidence.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,486

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Can We Justifiably Assume the Cosmological Principle in Order to Break Model Underdetermination in Cosmology?Claus Beisbart - 2009 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 40 (2):175-205.
Cosmology as a science.Peter G. Bergmann - 1970 - Foundations of Physics 1 (1):17-22.
Copernicus, Kant, and the anthropic cosmological principles.Sherrilyn Roush - 2003 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 34 (1):5-35.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
126 (#178,887)

6 months
5 (#752,882)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Claus Beisbart
University of Bern

Citations of this work

On under-determination in cosmology.Jeremy Butterfield - 2014 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 46 (1):57-69.
Does inflation solve the hot big bang model׳s fine-tuning problems?C. D. McCoy - 2015 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 51 (C):23-36.
Can We Justifiably Assume the Cosmological Principle in Order to Break Model Underdetermination in Cosmology?Claus Beisbart - 2009 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 40 (2):175-205.
The Implementation, Interpretation, and Justification of Likelihoods in Cosmology.C. D. McCoy - 2018 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 62:19-35.
Epistemic Justification and Methodological Luck in Inflationary Cosmology.C. D. McCoy - 2019 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 70 (4):1003-1028.

View all 16 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

The anthropic cosmological principle.John D. Barrow - 1986 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by Frank J. Tipler.
Cosmology.H. Bondi - 1954 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 4 (16):350-352.
Relativity, Gravitation, and World-Structure. [REVIEW]E. H. Kennard - 1936 - Philosophical Review 45 (3):324-325.

Add more references