Cited by 375Origins and Evolution of LifeSpace Science and Extraterrestrial LifeEarth Systems and Cosmic Evolution

The anthropic principle and its implications for biological evolution

Carter, Brandon·1983·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences

Abstract

In the form in which it was originally expounded, the anthropic principle was presented as a warning to astrophysical and cosmological theorists of the risk of error in the interpretation of astronomical and cosmological information unless due account is taken of the biological restraints under which the information was acquired. However, the converse message is also valid: biological theorists also run the risk of error in the interpretation of the evolutionary record unless they take due heed of the astrophysical restraints under which evolution took place. After an introductory discussion of the ordinary (‘weak’) anthropic principle and of its more contestable (‘strong’) analogue, a new application of the former to the problem of the evolution of terrestrial life is presented. It is shown that the evidence suggests that the evolutionary chain included at least one but probably not more than two links that were highly improbable (a priori) in the available time interval.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rsta.1983.0096

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the doomsday device example, Self Sampling boosts the posterior probability of the doomsday hypothesis from one in a million to close to one.

    “Since there are more centers in glorious-future worlds than doomsday worlds by a factor of billions, the posterior probability of the doomsday hypothesis is boosted from one in a million to close to one.”

    From Multiple Universes and Self-Locating Evidence (2022) · cites this paper as Carter 1983

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Carter, B.
Affiliations
Observatoire de Paris (FR)
Corresponding author
Carter, Brandon
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences
Published
1983-12-20
Volume
310
Issue
1512
Pages
347-363
ISSN
  • 0080-4614 (ISSN-L)
  • 2054-0272
OpenAlex
W2122258450
Cited by
375
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 9
FWCI
4.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A Mathematical and Physical Sciences (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Origins and Evolution of Life
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Space Science and Extraterrestrial Life
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Earth Systems and Cosmic Evolution
Keywords
anthropic principle, evolution

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review