In physics and cosmology, the anthropic principle says that we should take account

of the constraints that our existence as observers imposes on the sort of universe
that we could observe. Originally proposed as a rule of reasoning, the term has
since been extended to cover supposed "superlaws" that in various ways require the
universe to support intelligent life, usually assumed to be carbon-based, and
occasionally to be specifically human beings. Anthropic reasoning involves
assessing these constraints by analysing the properties of universes with different
fundamental parameters or laws of physics from ours, and has frequently concluded
that essential structures, from atomic nuclei to the whole universe, depend for
stability on delicate balances between different fundamental forces; balances which
only occur in a small minority of possible universes � so that ours seems to be
fine-tuned for life. Anthropic reasoning also attempts to explain and quantify this
fine tuning. Within the scientific community the usual approach is to invoke
selection effects from a real ensemble of alternate universes, which cause an
anthropic bias in what can be observed; competing strategies, occasionally also
called anthropic, include intelligent design.

The anthropic principle has led to more than a little confusion and controversy,
partly because several distinct ideas carry this label. All versions of the
principle have been accused of providing simplistic explanations which undermine
the search for a deeper physical understanding of the universe. The invocation of
either multiple universes or an intelligent designer are highly controversial, and
both ideas have been criticized by some as being presently untestable, and
therefore not within the purview of contemporary science.