This objection to the Doomsday Argument (DA), originally by Dennis Dieks (1992), developed by Bartha & Hitchcock (1999), and expanded by Ken Olum (2001), is that the possibility of you existing at all depends on how many humans will ever exist (N).
•
Under the SIA, as the potential size of N increases, the significance of the current number of births (n) decreases, to the point that this posterior information does not constrain the actual value of N at all.
Assumption of Mary | Doomsday Book | Assumption | The Doomsday Scenario | Doomsday Clock | Assumption Island | Assumption College | Doomsday | The Nurture Assumption | The Assumption of Hannele | Geographical indication | Assumption Cathedral | argument | Doomsday Preppers | Doomsday (film) | doomsday | Das Argument | Superman: Doomsday | Self-Indication Assumption Doomsday argument rebuttal | Plantinga's ontological argument | Ontological argument#Plantinga's modal form | Mr. Denton on Doomsday | Missionaries of the Assumption | Jose Chung's Doomsday Defense | Jose Chung's ''Doomsday Defense'' | Geographical Indication | Franciscan Province of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary | Four to Doomsday | Doomsday (The Office) | Doomsday Festival |
Although this anthropic principle was originally designed as a rebuttal to the Doomsday argument (by Dennis Dieks in 1992) it has general applications in the philosophy of anthropic reasoning, and Ken Olum has suggested it is important to the analysis of quantum cosmology.