  We analyze the arguments allegedly supporting the so-called Self-Indication
Assumption (SIA), as an attempt to reject counterintuitive consequences of the
Doomsday Argument of Carter, Leslie, Gott and others. Several arguments
purportedly supporting this assumption are demonstrated to be either flawed or,
at best, inconclusive. Therefore, no compelling reason for accepting SIA exists
so far, and it should be regarded as an ad hoc hypothesis with several rather
strange and implausible physical and epistemological consequences. Accordingly,
if one wishes to reject the controversial consequences of the Doomsday
Argument, a route different from SIA has to be found.
