Well, even within the wikipedia article you see quite a few definitions under 'variants'. It's also nearly a word for word copy of how it is defined in contrast

Well, even within the wikipedia article you see quite a few definitions under 'variants'. It's also nearly a word for word copy of how it is defined in contrast to the mediocrity principle ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediocrity_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediocrity_principle ) Either way, his point is fundamentally pretty close to even the WAP definition in the summary. I think it's fairly self evident, though. If there is only one set of observers in the entirety of the observable universe, those observers would be inaccurate in assuming that they are unlikely to be special because they exist and therefor others likely to as well. We just can't make a deduction about the probability of life based on the fact we exist, because for us to make that observation we have to exist, regardless of (im)probable it was. You can reach the same conclusion just thinking about selection bias - we have selected for intelligent life out of necessity, because if we hadn't, we couldn't be around to make the argument either way.