ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags !MOD BOX WARNING!

Closed Thread
Old 12th February 2018, 02:35 PM   #2961
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,279
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Are you guys saying that P(E|H) -- in our situation -- equals 1.00?

I'll repeat Carlitos's question: Jabba, why have you put two zeroes after the decimal point?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 02:39 PM   #2962
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 40,755
Originally Posted by Dancing David View Post
What were the odds of your parents having a baby?
Not sure; but if your parents didn't have any children, chances are you won't either.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Ezekiel 23:20
zooterkin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 02:57 PM   #2963
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,279
Originally Posted by zooterkin View Post
Not sure; but if your parents didn't have any children, chances are you won't either.

Quote:
Bloodnok:
Ned Seagoon? Well well well, what a coincidence! Seagoon! Yes of course, I remember. Didn't your father have a son?

Seagoon:
Oh I... I never asked him about his private affairs.

Bloodnok:
Seagoon, of course, of course, yes! I knew your father before you were born.

Seagoon:
I didn't.

Bloodnok:
I wish you had, things might have been different.
http://www.thegoonshow.net/scripts_s...e=s05e24_yehti
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 03:06 PM   #2964
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Perfection, NV
Posts: 29,223
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Am I wrong that likelihood is different than probability?
What does that have to do with the rebuttals you've gotten since your previous post? Which of the rebuttals mentioned it?
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 03:13 PM   #2965
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Perfection, NV
Posts: 29,223
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
For the last time...
LOL. Dreamer.
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 03:33 PM   #2966
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,764
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Are you guys saying that P(E|H) -- in our situation -- equals 1.00?
We're saying that you're tainting your reckoning of P(E|H) with other factors such as P(E) and P(H). This is because you have a poor conceptual understanding of what those are and how they would properly function in a statistical inference. This was one of the fatal flaws I identified last year. Instead of displaying an understanding of how the model works, you just assign random numbers to each of the terms in it. This is part of why people are asking you why you put the superfluous zeros after the decimal point. It seems you're trying to impress, rather than do things right. We aren't impressed, and neither will any other neutral audience be.

Also, you keep avoiding the question of how having a soul fixes things. You assert that P(E|H) is computed as very, very small, therefore you must have a soul. But because of the false dilemma you don't get to talk about the probability of an immortal soul as 1 - P(H|E). What you need to show us is P(soul|awareness)/P(materialism|awareness), properly formulated. You have already admitted you can't do this. And we agree, because it would require information that cannot be known. Because it cannot be known, you seem to think it's okay to make up whatever numbers you want, and that the result constitutes proof.

Instead, today you foisted yet another made-up number and polled for agreement. You begged agreement because you have no actual argument or data. Having received no agreement, you've embarked on a predictable course of obfuscation and evasion to distract from your latest ham-fisted foist having fallen as flat as all its predecessors. Now picture yourself presenting this to a conference room of bona fide statisticians. You say, "The likelihood of thus-and-such is this number." Do you really think not one single person in that room is going to raise his hand and say, "Um, Mr. Savage, how did you arrive at that value?" Do you really think you can avoid that question, in that company, by asking them if they know the difference between probability and likelihood? When you explain your rationale, and they say, "But Mr. Savage you are letting values vary in your reckoning of the likelihood which are, in fact, fixed," what are you going to say?
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 03:36 PM   #2967
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by godless dave View Post
I can't speak for anyone else, but I was answering the actual question you asked. This was your question:



That was the question I answered. "What is P(E|H)?" is a different question.
Dave,
- So, what is your answer to the latter?
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico Ť probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 03:38 PM   #2968
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
 
godless dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,266
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- So, what is your answer to the latter?
The same as all the other times you have asked me that question: I do not have enough data to make an estimate. I do not know all the starting conditions at the beginning of the universe. Even starting in, say, 1940, the year before my father was born, I would not have enough data to make an estimate.
__________________
"If it's real, then it gets more interesting the closer you examine it. If it's not real, just the opposite is true." - aggle-rithm

Last edited by godless dave; 12th February 2018 at 03:42 PM.
godless dave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 03:42 PM   #2969
jond
Illuminator
 
jond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,239
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- So, what is your answer to the latter?
If you wanted to know the answer to that question, why did you ask the other? Seems like a rather dishonest bait and switch tactic.
jond is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 03:42 PM   #2970
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,764
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
So, what is your answer to the latter?
Do not shift the burden of proof. You are the one claiming this is a computable value, and that it is computed as being very, very small. That burden is not satisfied by plunking a series of naked numbers on the table and asking people to agree with them. Further, your method completely sidesteps the antecedent requirement to prove P(E|H) is knowable or computable. You are the one claiming the ability to effect your proof according to your method. No one else in this debate has one iota of obligation that in any way impedes your responsibility.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 03:45 PM   #2971
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,764
Originally Posted by jond View Post
If you wanted to know the answer to that question, why did you ask the other? Seems like a rather dishonest bait and switch tactic.
He's frantically latching onto someone having said that P(E|H) = 1, which is not really how the objection to Jabba's mistake is most properly rendered. Jabba thinks one of his critics has made an error, so he's clinging to that as a means of backpedaling away from yet another failed foist.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 04:34 PM   #2972
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 72,392
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
He's frantically latching onto someone having said that P(E|H) = 1
Oops. It kind of is 1, however.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 05:52 PM   #2973
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,764
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Oops. It kind of is 1, however.
I apologize; I was brusque. "Most properly rendered" was pretentious and certainly not meant to offend. What I mean is that it would be better, in a explanatory setting, to show why it's 1. Stating it as an assertion just makes Jabba's knees jerk. That doesn't mean you are or were on the hook to explain it. It just means this is why Jabba thinks he is effectively deflecting the question.

Last edited by JayUtah; 12th February 2018 at 05:53 PM.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 06:41 PM   #2974
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 11,902
Again because Jabba's (probably bumbled) into a "When did you stop beating your wife?" style question, or at least what passes for one in Jabba's brain.

We can either give him an honest answer to the question he's asking which means he's trapped us in agreeing with him or we call him on the obvious subterfuge and he we didn't answer his question.

Jabba still thinks he's expertly trapping us in some linguistic, argumentative, or logical gotcha.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 12th February 2018 at 06:50 PM.
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 06:42 PM   #2975
carlitos
"mŠs divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 18,210
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
I'll repeat Carlitos's question: Jabba, why have you put two zeroes after the decimal point?


Maybe they didnít cover significant digits
in certified statistician school.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 06:46 PM   #2976
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 28,370
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Again because Jabba's (probably bumbled) into a "When did you stop beating your wife?" style question.

We can even honest answer to the question he's asking and he's trapped us in agreeing with him, we call him on the obvious subterfuge and he we didn't answer his question.
What?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 06:49 PM   #2977
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 8,789
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What?


The threadís insanity is infectious. Get out while you still can. Itís too late for most of us but thereís still hope for you.

Flee!

Fly you fools!
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 06:50 PM   #2978
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 11,902
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What?
I reworded it. I realized my original post didn't make any sense.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 07:09 PM   #2979
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 17,838
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- So, what is your answer to the latter?
5 years, same answers. You simply ignore them.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 07:17 PM   #2980
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Perfection, NV
Posts: 29,223
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- So, what is your answer to the latter?
What was his answer all those other times?
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 10:37 PM   #2981
Filippo Lippi
Master Poster
 
Filippo Lippi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,883
Originally Posted by Filippo Lippi View Post
Thermal may not be aware that another dishonest tactic employed by Jabba is to stop responding after he's been backed into a corner, but to continue to check back on the thread. There will then be yet another reset when Jabba deems that sufficient time has passed.
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Actually, I have a new, and easier, question.
- What is the likelihood of now being during my lifetime -- given OOFLam, the big bang and a lifetime of 100 years? I get 1/140,000,000 (at most).
- Does anyone here agree with me?
Like that
__________________
"You may not know anything about the issue but I bet you reckon something.
So why not tell us what you reckon? Let us enjoy the full majesty of your uninformed, ad hoc reckon..."
David Mitchell
Filippo Lippi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th February 2018, 10:40 PM   #2982
jt512
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,738
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Are you guys saying that P(E|H) -- in our situation -- equals 1.00?
"Our" situation? "We" have no situation. What you have is an argument in which P(E|H) = P(E|~H) = 1, as I have been saying for quite some time. That is fundamentally why your observation that you exist says nothing about whether you're immortal.

Last edited by jt512; 12th February 2018 at 10:57 PM.
jt512 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 12:27 AM   #2983
Pixel42
SchrŲdinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 10,438
Jabba: are you familiar with the concept of cargo cult science? Because what you are doing is cargo cult maths. You're trying to copy what real mathematicians do, but because you have no real understanding of why they' do it you're making silly mistakes and producing gibberish. You're the equivalent of the guy sitting in a bamboo tower wearing bamboo headphones assuming that what he's doing will produce the same results as a real air traffic controller. The cargo planes will never land, and you will never produce a real mathematical proof.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 01:34 AM   #2984
jt512
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,738
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
Jabba: are you familiar with the concept of cargo cult science? Because what you are doing is cargo cult maths. You're trying to copy what real mathematicians do, but because you have no real understanding of why they' do it you're making silly mistakes and producing gibberish. You're the equivalent of the guy sitting in a bamboo tower wearing bamboo headphones assuming that what he's doing will produce the same results as a real air traffic controller. The cargo planes will never land, and you will never produce a real mathematical proof.

That says it all.
jt512 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 08:35 AM   #2985
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Actually, I have a new, and easier, question.
- What is the likelihood of now being during my lifetime -- given OOFLam, the big bang and a lifetime of 100 years? I get 1/140,000,000 (at most).
- Does anyone here agree with me?
Originally Posted by godless dave View Post
1. This is the only time you could have been alive, because your life is the result of previous events.
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Am I wrong that likelihood is different than probability?
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Are you guys saying that P(E|H) -- in our situation -- equals 1.00?
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- But P(E|H) is not 1.
Originally Posted by godless dave View Post
I can't speak for anyone else, but I was answering the actual question you asked. This was your question:
- What is the likelihood of now being during my lifetime -- given OOFLam, the big bang and a lifetime of 100 years? I get 1/140,000,000 (at most).


That was the question I answered. "What is P(E|H)?" is a different question.
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- So, what is your answer to the latter?
Originally Posted by godless dave View Post
The same as all the other times you have asked me that question: I do not have enough data to make an estimate. I do not know all the starting conditions at the beginning of the universe. Even starting in, say, 1940, the year before my father was born, I would not have enough data to make an estimate.
Dave,
- Both questions are about the random likelihood of an event.
- So again, what is the random likelihood of now being during my lifetime -- given OOFLam, the big bang and a lifetime of 100 years?
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico Ť probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 08:36 AM   #2986
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
 
godless dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,266
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- Both questions are about the random likelihood of an event.
- So again, what is the random likelihood of now being during my lifetime -- given OOFLam, the big bang and a lifetime of 100 years?
1. If you exist, then your lifetime has to be now, because of the preconditions of your existence.
__________________
"If it's real, then it gets more interesting the closer you examine it. If it's not real, just the opposite is true." - aggle-rithm
godless dave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 08:41 AM   #2987
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 72,392
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
I apologize; I was brusque. "Most properly rendered" was pretentious and certainly not meant to offend.
Please don't grovel on the floor on my account. There's no offense or need to apologise. Keep doing what you're doing.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 08:46 AM   #2988
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 72,392
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- So again, what is the random likelihood of now being during my lifetime -- given OOFLam, the big bang and a lifetime of 100 years?
1.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 08:51 AM   #2989
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Are you guys saying that P(E|H) -- in our situation -- equals 1.00?
Originally Posted by jt512 View Post
"Our" situation? "We" have no situation. What you have is an argument in which P(E|H) = P(E|~H) = 1, as I have been saying for quite some time. That is fundamentally why your observation that you exist says nothing about whether you're immortal.
jt,
- I looked through 'chapters' VI and VII and couldn't find anything about P(E|H) = P(E|~H) = 1. I don't understand what you're saying.
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico Ť probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 08:52 AM   #2990
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,718
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Both questions are about the random likelihood of an event.
You're assuming it's random then. Not only might that be wrong, it's absolutely wrong the way you seem to be implying it. You did not appear one day out of nothing, you are the result of a whole chain of events that logically follow from each other in a non-random way.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- So again, what is the random likelihood of now being during my lifetime -- given OOFLam, the big bang and a lifetime of 100 years?
What does the big bang have to do with anything, Jabba? Why would we want to try and determine the likelihood of something right now based on conditions that are like 13.8 billion years out of date? Conditions that we can't re-create, don't have a detailed record of, etc.? That's absurd.

And I'm essentially talking to myself, which is also absurd. Why do I keep posting? This has been going on for more than five years and Jabba will never learn and nothing will happen and the discussion will never go anywhere and his formula is so clearly wrong there's really no need to put any effort into disproving it anyway and yet I keep coming back. Something is wrong with me.

Anyway! File this with all the other posts that will get ignored. I'll be back later to write another one because I guess I am some sort of masochist with nothing better to do. Have a great morning everyone!
SOdhner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 09:02 AM   #2991
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
 
godless dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,266
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
And I'm essentially talking to myself, which is also absurd. Why do I keep posting? This has been going on for more than five years and Jabba will never learn and nothing will happen and the discussion will never go anywhere and his formula is so clearly wrong there's really no need to put any effort into disproving it anyway and yet I keep coming back. Something is wrong with me.
Whatever is wrong with you is also wrong with me.
__________________
"If it's real, then it gets more interesting the closer you examine it. If it's not real, just the opposite is true." - aggle-rithm
godless dave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 09:03 AM   #2992
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- Both questions are about the random likelihood of an event.
- So again, what is the random likelihood of now being during my lifetime -- given OOFLam, the big bang and a lifetime of 100 years?
Originally Posted by godless dave View Post
1. If you exist, then your lifetime has to be now, because of the preconditions of your existence.
Dave,
- This is not a question involving cause and effect. This is about random likelihood.
- It's the same kind of question as, "What is the likelihood of you winning the lottery (given that you won it)?
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico Ť probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 09:09 AM   #2993
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
 
godless dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,266
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- This is not a question involving cause and effect. This is about random likelihood.
- It's the same kind of question as, "What is the likelihood of you winning the lottery (given that you won it)?
Then your question is flawed, because your existence is the result of cause and effect.
__________________
"If it's real, then it gets more interesting the closer you examine it. If it's not real, just the opposite is true." - aggle-rithm
godless dave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 09:09 AM   #2994
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,718
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- This is not a question involving cause and effect. This is about random likelihood.
You're not random. You did not just mysteriously pop into existence one day.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- It's the same kind of question as, "What is the likelihood of you winning the lottery (given that you won it)?
1. If you already won the lottery, it's 1.

BUT I do know what you mean, on the lottery part. It's just that you're still wrong because you don't understand what the Sharpshooter Fallacy is. The odds of you, specifically, winning the lottery is what you want to look at. What you *should* be looking at is the odds that *someone* will win the lottery, since anyone that wins will be marveling that it happened to them.

Jabba, what are the odds that *someone* will win the lottery?
SOdhner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 09:16 AM   #2995
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,764
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
jt, I looked through 'chapters' VI and VII and couldn't find anything about P(E|H) = P(E|~H) = 1. I don't understand what you're saying.
And that was the most cargo-culty response you could have given.

You don't get math. Which is to say, you don't get what people mean when they express themselves in mathematical notation. You seem to know a few of the rules of algebra. But you don't understand important concepts in mathematics. More importantly, you can't distill the underlying thoughts if someone writes in math.

So what do you do when someone repeats an objection, but writes it in mathematical form? You frantically search the thread for that exact expression and panic when you can't find the exact thing mentioned. It's your equivalent to bamboo headphones. Instead you could just read what the math is telling you.

Your entire model lives in a space where P(E) = 1. This is how you express, in mathematical terms, the notion that your entire proof resides entirely in a space where you already exist. Equating P(E|H) to P(E|~H) is how you express, in mathematical terms, that the likelihood of E is not affected by H. That too arises out of the notion that your proof lives entirely in a space where E is a given, and therefore P(E) doesn't vary according to anything. It's math for saying that if you start with your existence as a given rather than as data, the relative likelihoods of different hypotheses for how you got there are moot. Whichever other event was in play, it clearly happened.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 09:16 AM   #2996
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 72,392
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
This is not a question involving cause and effect. This is about random likelihood.
No, it's about cause and effect. You simply refuse to understand that.


Quote:
- It's the same kind of question as, "What is the likelihood of you winning the lottery (given that you won it)?
And it has the same answer: 1.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 09:21 AM   #2997
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,764
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
This is not a question involving cause and effect. This is about random likelihood.
I assume at some point your father sat you down and gave you the "birds and the bees" talk, which should have emphasized the cause-and-effect relationship of having sexual intercourse. Your existence is exactly a matter of observable causes and effects. Now in terms of the whole human race those causes and effects, due to the properties of chaos theory that govern who has sex with whom over many generations, become unpredictable from first principles. And because you don't understand predictability, you punt and say it must be random.

But none of that matters because you implant your proof in a space defined by your existence, regardless of how you came to exist.

Quote:
It's the same kind of question as, "What is the likelihood of you winning the lottery (given that you won it)?
No, it's not. See the earlier parts of the thread for the repeated discussion of how existence is not like a lottery.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 09:26 AM   #2998
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,764
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
It's the same kind of question as, "What is the likelihood of you winning the lottery (given that you won it)?
P(A|A) = 1 for all A. This is why you can't explain the Texas sharpshooter fallacy in your own words.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 09:27 AM   #2999
The Sparrow
Graduate Poster
 
The Sparrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Central Canada
Posts: 1,470
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
You're not random. You did not just mysteriously pop into existence one day.
...
But its random that his body/brain actually tuned into the particular clump of jabba-soul from the "pool of consciousness".

The Sparrow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th February 2018, 09:28 AM   #3000
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 72,392
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
P(A|A) = 1 for all A.
This seems so obvious...



We should answer jabba's every post with a mathematical equation, just to see him flip out.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:44 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.