The Longevity Argument

My book, The Longevity Argument: The Doomsday Argument is wrong, and logical induction has a philosophical basis, is now available on in paperback (list price of $9). Just click this cover:


Here is a description of the book.

The Doomsday Argument, Self-Sampling Assumption, and Self-Indication Assumption are wrong; J. Richard Gott III’s delta t argument underestimates longevity, providing lower bounds on probabilities of longevity, and is equivalent to Laplace’s Rule of Succession; but Non-Parametric Predictive Inference based on the work of Bruce M. Hill and Frank P.A. Coolen is consistent with a plausible theory of induction; and Ayn Rand’s identification of characteristics as ranges of measurement establishes a philosophical foundation for such a theory of induction. This book is a much-revised and much-expanded version of the author’s article, “Past Longevity as Evidence for the Future,” published in the January 2009 issue of Philosophy of Science, often recognized as the leading peer-reviewed journal on the philosophy of science. Since its publication, that article has been cited favorably in these top-ranked philosophical journals: Journal of PhilosophyAnalysisSynthese, and Ratio.

Here is the Table of Contents:

1. Introduction
2. Doom Soon vs. Doom Late
3. The past as evidence for the future
4. Confusion between future duration and total duration
5. Bayesian analysis of future duration based on past duration
6. Where the Doomsday Argument goes wrong
7. Gott’s delta t formula revisited
8. Time as a valid reference class
9. Conclusion: A calculus for induction
Index of Persons