OT: An Existential Dilemma

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Stormbinder:
In this case you would have one seriously sick in the head god

If God exists, I'm not placing much faith in his sanity anyway: I mean, what kind of whacko would do something like creating the universe? Even *I* am not that crazy: This is probably one of the worst things that's ever happened, given that it has made a lot of people very angry, and can thus be regarded as a bad move.

[Stormbinder]

Originally posted by Zapmeister:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stormbinder:
but you can, assuming that you posses enough historical related information, operate with terms such as "very likely", "possible", "highly unlikely", etc.

Mmm, I know people do use those terms when addressing questions of historical fact. My point was that they're misusing the terms to describe their confidence in their belief, rather than to quantify a probability. I think.

---

Perhaps, to some degree. But there have to be some connection between the "pure probability" that you are searching for Zapmeister, and personal confidence of the professianals who posses all related knowledge and expertise in this specific matter, don't you think? Granted, often it maybe hard to express in exact numbers though.


Besides, let's assume for the sake of argument that you are right about historical facts. But than the same logic could be aplied to almost every other none-historical field as well. For example take jurisprudence. One could argue that the jury, (or professional judjes in some cases/countries) when they are declaring "guilty" or "not guilty" verdicts, based upon "beyond reasonable doubts" clause as requred by law, are also operating outside the field of probabilities. But if this is true, that they might as well deciding wether they like the guy or not, without listening to any evidence. Or even throw the coin and see if it is heads or tails. If these all are purely existantial matters and have nothing to do with probabilities than I think one could successefully argue for such aproaches over the ones that is currently employed world-wide. Do you agree?

[Zapmeister]

Originally posted by Norfleet:
This is probably one of the worst things that's ever happened, given that it has made a lot of people very angry, and can thus be regarded as a bad move.

I think you should acknowledge Douglas Adams as the author of this. It's not verbatim, but it's close enough IMHO.

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Zapmeister:
I think you should acknowledge Douglas Adams as the author of this. It's not verbatim, but it's close enough IMHO.

Douglas Adams is the author of the original quote, and I was not, in fact, quoting him verbatim. The original quote was "In the beginning, the universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."

[Zapmeister]

Originally posted by Stormbinder:
Perhaps, to some degree. But there have to be some connection between the "pure probability" that you are searching for Zapmeister, and personal confidence of the professianals who posses all related knowledge and expertise in this specific matter, don't you think? Granted, often it maybe hard to express in exact numbers though.

Certainly. In fact, questions of historical fact could be regarded as equivalent to existential questions. "Does the event 'The Great Flood' exist as an element in the history of our world?"

EDIT: Hmmm. I just realized that this does not in any way address the paragraph I quoted.

Besides, let's assume for the sake of argument that you are right about historical facts. But than the same logic could be aplied to almost every other none-historical field as well. For example take jurisprudence. One could argue that the jury, (or professional judjes in some cases/countries) when they are declaring "guilty" or "not guilty" verdicts, based upon "beyond reasonable doubts" clause as requred by law, are also operating outside the field of probabilities.

Indeed they are. They rely on beliefs formed during the examination of evidence. The expression "beyond reasonable doubt" underlines that, by placing a minimum level on the confidence in belief that is required. Probability is not involved.

My recollection of first year probability (irrelevent trivia: the lecturer was John Donaldson, father of Mary Donaldson, recently the Princess of Denmark) is that this field of mathematics was originally designed to help analyse and win gambling games.

It weights the tree of possibilities that extend from the present moment into the future. It does not say anything about isolated premises whose truth or falsehood is already set in stone.

[ May 25, 2004, 08:52: Message edited by: Zapmeister ]

[Zapmeister]

Originally posted by Norfleet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zapmeister:
I think you should acknowledge Douglas Adams as the author of this. It's not verbatim, but it's close enough IMHO.

Douglas Adams is the author of the original quote, and I was not, in fact, quoting him verbatim.

---

That's what I said.

[Tris]

It is meaningless, for example, to conclude that there is a 60% chance that there is a god. Either there is a god or there isn't - there's no 60% about it.

If you are going to be like that about it then:

Given a set of starting conditions any given system will develop in accordance with the laws of physics.

If you know the starting conditions you can predict the events arising therefrom, and hence calculate a new set of "starting conditions" for the system at time X, where X is arbitraraly large.

(I can't spell that arbi word, it appears)

Given that, due to CPT symmetry (ok, actually just the T part will do) X can be negative as well as positive, and indeed can be arbitar...damn can be as negative as you want it to be, if you know the starting conditions then talking about probability at all is meaningless. Everything either won't/hasn't happen(ed) or will/has happen(ed).

Of course, if you mean "given the limits of human knowledge and understanding there is a 60% chance that this will happen", that makes more sense, but then "given the limits of human knowledge and understanding there is a 60% chance god exists" is also sensible.

The upshot of this, for those who weren't following carefully, is you should place your palm on the screen, take out your credit cards, and send me your money.