Abstract
AbstractHow special (or not) is the epoch we are living in? What is the appropriate reference class for embedding the observations made at the present time? How probable – or else – is anything we observe in the fulness of time? Contemporary cosmology and astrobiology bring those seemingly old-fashioned philosophical issues back into focus. There are several examples of contemporary research which use the assumption of typicality in time (or temporal Copernicanism) explicitly or implicitly, while not truly elaborating upon the meaning of this assumption. The present paper brings attention to the underlying and often uncritically accepted assumptions in these cases. It also aims to defend a more radical position that typicality in time is not – and cannot ever be – well-defined, in contrast to the typicality in space, and the typicality in various specific parameter spaces. This, of course, does not mean that we are atypical in time; instead, the notion of typicality in time is necessarily somewhat vague and restricted. In principle, it could be strengthened by further defining the relevant context, e.g. by referring to typicality within the Solar lifetime, or some similar restricting clause.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous),Space and Planetary Science,Physics and Astronomy (miscellaneous),Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Cited by
12 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Beyond mediocrity: how common is life?;Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society;2023-04-20
2. The Noonday argument: fine-graining, indexicals, and the nature of Copernican reasoning;International Journal of Astrobiology;2023-03-22
3. A Bayesian Analysis of Technological Intelligence in Land and Oceans;The Astrophysical Journal;2023-03-01
4. Statistical Issues in the Search for Technosignatures;Technosignatures for Detecting Intelligent Life in Our Universe;2022-06-07
5. SETI in 2020;Acta Astronautica;2022-01