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 22nd June 2017, 12:12 PM   #41
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
 
godless dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,098
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- I think that's wrong.
- When an event is unlikely to happen given a particular hypothesis, it is potential evidence against the hypothesis, in that, it being evidence depends upon other conditions. Here, one of the conditions is that the "hypothesis predicts a wide variety of possible events, each of them individually unlikely."
I don't know of any approach to science or logic that views unlikelihood that way. You would only call a hypothesis into question if events happened more (or less) often than the hypothesis predicts.

In any case, the particular hypothesis under discussion does predict a wide variety of possible events, each of them individually unlikely, so we can both agree that in this case, an unlikely event happening is not evidence against the hypothesis.
__________________
"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; 22nd June 2017 at 12:15 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 22nd June 2017, 12:15 PM   #42
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,524
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
I think that's wrong.
It isn't.

Quote:
When an event is unlikely to happen given a particular hypothesis, it is potential evidence against the hypothesis...
No, because it can be equally potent against the line of reasoning that purports to connect the evidence to the hypothesis. This is, in fact, one of the ways in which Bayes is used legitimately when the priors are measured. I covered this earlier as two or three of the fatal flaws in your argument. It has been explained to you exactly how and why you're wrong on this point. Simply insisting in the face of it that you aren't is wishful thinking.
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 22nd June 2017, 12:17 PM   #43
JoeBentley
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeBentley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 8,400
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Unacceptable.

I don't mean the statement is unacceptable, I mean that it is unacceptable for you to be making an "opening statement" in the sixth chapter of this five-year debate.
Seriously Jabba read that. Read it twice. Recite it before bed like a prayer. Get it tattooed on your forehead backwards so you have to read it everytime you look in a mirror.

We are over half a decade, six separate "canon" threads, almost as many spin-off threads, two distinct message boards into this discussion and you are still re-arraiging the pieces on the board enough to make your opening move.

Do you, on any level, even begin to grasp how insane that is?
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Hating a bad thing does not make you good." - David Wong

Last edited by JoeBentley; 22nd June 2017 at 12:32 PM.
JoeBentley 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 22nd June 2017, 12:21 PM   #44
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,708
Originally Posted by JoeBentley View Post
This is like a Dark Souls boss battle.
Except with the boss just running away.


YOU LIVED.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか


Last edited by Argumemnon; 22nd June 2017 at 12:25 PM.
Argumemnon 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 22nd June 2017, 12:22 PM   #45
Jabba
Illuminator
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,966
-This is getting exciting! I'll be back!
__________________
"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 č probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba 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 22nd June 2017, 12:25 PM   #46
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,708
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
-This is getting exciting!
What definition of that word are you using?
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon 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 22nd June 2017, 12:27 PM   #47
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
 
godless dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,098
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
-This is getting exciting! I'll be back!
Is it more exciting than all the other times we had the exact same discussion?

Last time you got excited about a line of discussion you ended up abandoning it.
__________________
"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 22nd June 2017, 12:35 PM   #48
jond
Illuminator
 
jond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,023
Originally Posted by godless dave View Post
Is it more exciting than all the other times we had the exact same discussion?

Last time you got excited about a line of discussion you ended up abandoning it.
Abandoned very quickly, too. Odd how when shown his errors, he quickly moves away into something else. Only to return with the same long destroyed arguments as though he'd never seen any response at all to them.
jond 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 22nd June 2017, 12:40 PM   #49
Jabba
Illuminator
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,966
Originally Posted by godless dave View Post
I don't know of any approach to science or logic that views unlikelihood that way. You would only call a hypothesis into question if events happened more (or less) often than the hypothesis predicts.

In any case, the particular hypothesis under discussion does predict a wide variety of possible events, each of them individually unlikely, so we can both agree that in this case, an unlikely event happening is not evidence against the hypothesis.
Dave,
- Since Jay just responded to this sub-issue, I'll defer to him. If I get a chance, I'll respond to your response later.
__________________
"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 č probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba 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 22nd June 2017, 12:42 PM   #50
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,524
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
This is getting exciting! I'll be back!
This sounds suspiciously like your main interest is just keeping people on the hook as some sort of audience or unwilling actors in your drama. Prove otherwise.

We've discussed this particular point before, several times. You never found it exciting before, at least not in the way your critics may understand the term. Two weeks ago I addressed your ongoing misunderstanding of the probative value of statistical inference. Your professed excitement today hasn't compelled you to rejoin the argument. "I think you're wrong" is not an actionable rejoinder. You must engage the substance of the rebuttal.
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 22nd June 2017, 12:43 PM   #51
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
 
godless dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,098
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- Since Jay just responded to this sub-issue, I'll defer to him. If I get a chance, I'll respond to your response later.
This post did neither.
__________________
"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 22nd June 2017, 12:44 PM   #52
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,524
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- Since Jay just responded to this sub-issue, I'll defer to him. If I get a chance, I'll respond to your response later.
No, answer both me and Dave, as we have both found separate faults with your claim. Neither Dave nor I has agreed to be your sole critic, nor to the larger issue of whether there should be a sole critic. You are responsible for all serious criticism as long as you are posting in a public forum in which all members may post.

Nor have I agreed to the "sub-issue ad infinitum" schedule of debate. I have identified elven individually fatal flaws in your argument (with perhaps more to come as we run across them). If you're going to be answering me, I have already said I expect a comprehensive answer to my comprehensive rebuttal within short order (a day or so). I have also identified a half dozen or so dishonest techniques that I wish you to address. Please provide a complete answer, not a hopscotch jaunt through the ones you think you can answer. I do not accept today's attempt at a fringe reset, as I already addressed comprehensively your "outline" from the first week of June.

Last edited by JayUtah; 22nd June 2017 at 12:48 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 22nd June 2017, 01:03 PM   #53
Jabba
Illuminator
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,966
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
No, answer both me and Dave, as we have both found separate faults with your claim. Neither Dave nor I has agreed to be your sole critic, nor to the larger issue of whether there should be a sole critic. You are responsible for all serious criticism as long as you are posting in a public forum in which all members may post.

Nor have I agreed to the "sub-issue ad infinitum" schedule of debate. I have identified elven individually fatal flaws in your argument (with perhaps more to come as we run across them). If you're going to be answering me, I have already said I expect a comprehensive answer to my comprehensive rebuttal within short order (a day or so). I have also identified a half dozen or so dishonest techniques that I wish you to address. Please provide a complete answer, not a hopscotch jaunt through the ones you think you can answer. I do not accept today's attempt at a fringe reset, as I already addressed comprehensively your "outline" from the first week of June.
Jay,
- For some reason, you can't appreciate my problem in keeping up with all the arguments sent my way...
- I can't even keep up with just your arguments.
- I'm amazed at how fast you are -- I guess that's why you can't appreciate my problem with keeping up...
- Anyway, per you're 'request,' I'll see what I can do with Dave's disagreement first and get to yours later -- if you or Dave don't respond to my response to Dave first, or I don't feel like someone else especially deserves a response first...
__________________
"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 č probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba 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 22nd June 2017, 01:10 PM   #54
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
 
godless dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,098
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Jay,
- For some reason, you can't appreciate my problem in keeping up with all the arguments sent my way...
- I can't even keep up with just your arguments.
- I'm amazed at how fast you are -- I guess that's why you can't appreciate my problem with keeping up...
- Anyway, per you're 'request,' I'll see what I can do with Dave's disagreement first and get to yours later -- if you or Dave don't respond to my response to Dave first, or I don't feel like someone else especially deserves a response first...
It's hard to believe you have trouble keeping up with arguments when you waste time writing posts declaring your intention to respond later.
__________________
"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 22nd June 2017, 01:14 PM   #55
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,524
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
For some reason, you can't appreciate my problem in keeping up with all the arguments sent my way...
Not for "some" reason -- for the reasons I carefully laid out yesterday. I have no sympathy for the illusion of martyrdom you seem bent on creating around you. Quit whining, stalling, summarizing, and arranging. Your critics have been especially forbearing up to this point, but we're sick of your excuses.

Quote:
Anyway, per you're 'request,' I'll see what I can do with Dave's disagreement first...
Do that instead of begging for special treatment, announcing your guest seating order, and all other distractive crap you've subjected us to today. Nearly all your posts today have been the same ham-fisted manipulation attempts I warned you about yesterday. Get rid of those and you'll have time to address the several challenges to the merits of your claim.

Quote:
...I don't feel like someone else especially deserves a response first...
Your feelings are irrelevant. Criticism against you doesn't go away or cease to have value simply because you don't feel like answering it. Don't act like such a prima donna.
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 22nd June 2017, 01:17 PM   #56
Jabba
Illuminator
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,966
Originally Posted by godless dave View Post
I don't know of any approach to science or logic that views unlikelihood that way. You would only call a hypothesis into question if events happened more (or less) often than the hypothesis predicts...
Dave,
- What if an hypothesis claimed that X should never occur, and X occurs?
If we can get past the sharp shooter issue, as far as I can tell, mathematics says that H is probably wrong.
- Gotta go. I'll be back
__________________
"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 č probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba 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 22nd June 2017, 01:20 PM   #57
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,708
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- For some reason, you can't appreciate my problem in keeping up with all the arguments sent my way...
No, we just don't believe it. You've proven time and time again that you _CAN_ keep up with everything, what with the amount of repetition you post here, the time to post it you could use to address people's arguments. You've also had quite the time and memory to go back to quote people from time to time.

So no, this is just an excuse, and we don't believe you.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon 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 22nd June 2017, 01:22 PM   #58
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
 
godless dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,098
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- What if an hypothesis claimed that X should never occur, and X occurs?
Then the hypothesis is wrong.

Keep in mind that "very unlikely" does not mean "impossible".

Given a regulation 52 card deck of playing cards, it's very unlikely I will be dealt a royal flush. If I am dealt a royal flush, that is not evidence against the hypothesis that this is a regulation 52 card deck of playing cards. If I am dealt two forests, a mountain, a Fireball, a Lightning Bolt, and Sol Ring, and a Shivan Dragon, then it's definitely not a regulation 52 card deck of playing cards.
__________________
"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; 22nd June 2017 at 01:24 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 22nd June 2017, 01:22 PM   #59
jond
Illuminator
 
jond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,023
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- What if an hypothesis claimed that X should never occur, and X occurs?
If we can get past the sharp shooter issue, as far as I can tell, mathematics says that H is probably wrong.
- Gotta go. I'll be back
People exist. Under H, selves are an emergent property of a functioning brain. They are generated by the brain. Under H, the likelihood of your self existing and your brain existing are exactly the same. Mathematics says that H is far more likely than your preferred hypothesis in which selves require both the brain and a non physical soul.
jond 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 22nd June 2017, 01:31 PM   #60
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,524
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
What if an hypothesis claimed that X should never occur, and X occurs?
Wrong question. X has a probability of occurring under some hypothesis H. How that's determined varies according to formulation. If P(X|H) is, say, based on historical data then we can reason about P(H|X) by observing a series of X. If, however, P(X|H) is purely speculative, then P(H) as a prior must have some factual basis. (It does not, in your formulation.) Observing P(X|H) over many X in a way that seems to contract H means that the speculated method of reckoning P(X|H) is where the error lies.

This is covered under two of the fatal flaws I already pointed out in your argument. Do not simply continue to make the same errors. Further, the specific way in which you formulate P(X|H) has been separately shown to be untenable. That's one or two other previously-identified fatal errors.

Further, under no circumstances does a statistical inference that concludes X cannot happen constitute proof that X did not happen. If X happened, the probability that it should happen under whatever circumstances prevailed is simply irrelevant.

Quote:
If we can get past the sharp shooter issue...
We will not "get past" the issue in the way you want, which is to disregard that you're committing it and that it's a fatal flaw in your argument. You assign significance to X, and thus to P(X|H), only after you observe what X is. There is no statistical tap-dance that makes that not an error.

Quote:
as far as I can tell, mathematics says that H is probably wrong.
- Gotta go. I'll be back
"As far as [you] can tell" ignores several fatal errors beyond the two or three you've focused on this afternoon. You laid out your argument in a comprehensive fashion and I gave you a comprehensive response. There were a dozen individually fatal errors that you have not even acknowledged much less rejoined. No, you can't say that once you get past a couple of initial errors, the rest just falls into place. You don't get to leap over all your critics' subsequent objections and land at the desired conclusion.
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 22nd June 2017, 01:37 PM   #61
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 11,915
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- What if an hypothesis claimed that X should never occur, and X occurs?
If we can get past the sharp shooter issue, as far as I can tell, mathematics says that H is probably wrong.
- Gotta go. I'll be back
You've been saying that for 5 years, with no logic or evidence that supports you. You just keep repeating it and you have convinced nobody here or anywhere else.
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave
John Jones 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 22nd June 2017, 01:51 PM   #62
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,708
Originally Posted by godless dave View Post
Given a regulation 52 card deck of playing cards, it's very unlikely I will be dealt a royal flush.
It must be stated, though, that every combination of cards is equally as unlikely, since there are only one of each in the deck.

Quote:
If I am dealt two forests, a mountain, a Fireball, a Lightning Bolt, and Sol Ring, and a Shivan Dragon, then it's definitely not a regulation 52 card deck of playing cards.
Your age is showing.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon 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 22nd June 2017, 01:53 PM   #63
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,708
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
If we can get past the sharp shooter issue (snip)
Past? The sharp shooter issue KILLS your entire argument. Your claim and everything in it and about it fails completely because of it. You won't get past it; you have to explain why it's not a sharp shooter fallacy, or change your theory entirely.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon 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 22nd June 2017, 02:07 PM   #64
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Prosperity, AZ
Posts: 28,159
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
If we can get past the sharp shooter issue
You do that by drawing the circle on the side of the barn before you shoot.

When exactly are you drawing your circle?
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 22nd June 2017, 02:28 PM   #65
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,524
Originally Posted by godless dave View Post
Given a regulation 52 card deck of playing cards, it's very unlikely I will be dealt a royal flush.
It's equally unlikely you'll be dealt a Plebeian Sampler:
  • 5 of hearts
  • 8 of spades
  • jack of spades
  • 3 of clubs
  • 9 of diamonds

The gist of poker is that you don't get to identify that as a winning hand after the deal. Where Jabba constantly thinks he's avoided the Texas sharpshooter fallacy is in saying he's not talking about you or me or him, but all seven billion people all living. Well, that's just like the other three people at the table each declaring that whatever they were dealt is also a winning hand. The fallacy is in the timing of the assignment of significance to the sample, not the size of the sample.


Quote:
If I am dealt two forests, a mountain, a Fireball, a Lightning Bolt, and Sol Ring, and a Shivan Dragon, then it's definitely not a regulation 52 card deck of playing cards.
Oooh, a Denebian Full House!
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 22nd June 2017, 02:55 PM   #66
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 9,928
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Jay,
- For some reason, you can't appreciate my problem in keeping up with all the arguments sent my way...
- I can't even keep up with just your arguments.
What is the probability that someone who can't even keep up with the arguments on an internet forum could have come up with an insight, let alone a mathematical proof, that has eluded humanity's finest minds for centuries?

Show your working.
__________________
"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 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 22nd June 2017, 02:56 PM   #67
JoeBentley
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeBentley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 8,400
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
For some reason, you can't appreciate my problem in keeping up with all the arguments sent my way.
Jabba listen to me carefully. It's not that we "don't appreciate" it, it's that we don't believe it. This befuddled old man routine is an obvious, transparant stalling attempt.

Quote:
I can't even keep up with just your arguments.
Jabba you data dump entire flowcharts of how you want the argument to go. Stop pretending we believe you "just can't keep up."

Quote:
I'm amazed at how fast you are -- I guess that's why you can't appreciate my problem with keeping up.
The only problem you have is not being able to admit you are wrong.

Quote:
Anyway, per you're 'request,' I'll see what I can do with Dave's disagreement first and get to yours later -- if you or Dave don't respond to my response to Dave first, or I don't feel like someone else especially deserves a response first...
I know to a metaphysical certainty that we could wait until the heat death of the universe an you will not have answered anyone's question.

Jabba again we're no stupid. We know what you are doing. It wouldn't take you anymore time to answer the questions than it would to provide another long, elaborate excuse as to why you aren't answering them yet.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
What if an hypothesis claimed that X should never occur, and X occurs?
I hypothesize that you owe me a hundred thousand dollars in golden doubloons. I claim that the proof of this is that my cat will never sprout wings and fly into space. Therefore the fact that my cat hasn't sprouted wings and flown into space is evidence that you do in fact owe me a hundred thousand dollars in gold doubloons.

You can't just call something a hypothesis Jabba. That word means something.

Quote:
If we can get past the sharp shooter issue, as far as I can tell, mathematics says that H is probably wrong.
Oh Jesus goddamn Christ. "If you get past the part that proves I am wrong, as far as I can tell I am probably right"

And we could have steak and eggs if we had some steak. And some eggs.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Hating a bad thing does not make you good." - David Wong
JoeBentley 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 22nd June 2017, 03:03 PM   #68
Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
 
Hokulele's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Biggest Little City in the World
Posts: 29,532
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
What if an hypothesis claimed that X should never occur, and X occurs?

The first problem is, the hypothesis does not claim that you should never occur.

Quote:
If we can get past the sharp shooter issue, as far as I can tell, mathematics says that H is probably wrong.

Translation: If you completely ignore the fact that I based my argument on a fatal fallacy, you must agree that it is correct! Now mind you, that doesn't mean H is actually true*, just that you can't prove it false through fallacies. You actually have to be more intellectually rigorous to do what you are claiming to have done.


* - The preponderance of evidence does that quite nicely, at the moment.
__________________
"Oh god...What have you done, zooterkin? WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?!?!?!" - Cleon
Hokulele 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 22nd June 2017, 03:32 PM   #69
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 17,724
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
What is the probability that someone who can't even keep up with the arguments on an internet forum could have come up with an insight, let alone a mathematical proof, that has eluded humanity's finest minds for centuries?



Show your working.


:
carlitos 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 22nd June 2017, 03:48 PM   #70
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,524
Originally Posted by JoeBentley View Post
The only problem you have is not being able to admit you are wrong.
The more delicate contours of that problem might be that Jabba may think we need his admission of error in order for us to be confident in our judgment. This, like many fringe tactics, is a distortion of a common human behavior. When confronted with our own errors, before admitting them we want not only to see the proof of error, but to reason for ourselves how it happened. If we can't do that -- specifically if we don't have the wherewithal to see how we erred -- we hold out hope to still be right. We figure that if it's hard for us to see how we err, it must be equally hard for others to see it and therefore we might not actually be wrong. Projecting our confusion onto others is one of several flavors of the same general class of defense mechanism.

Here, of course, there is no confusion. Jabba's argument is obviously wrong, according to a number of very simple and well-known kinds of error. We don't need his concession in order to be sure his proof doesn't work. Again, most people like to think that if they're wrong, they can only be wrong in subtle, questionable ways -- not very simple ones.

Quote:
I hypothesize that you owe me a hundred thousand dollars in golden doubloons. I claim that the proof of this is that my cat will never sprout wings and fly into space. Therefore the fact that my cat hasn't sprouted wings and flown into space is evidence that you do in fact owe me a hundred thousand dollars in gold doubloons.
This is what I allude to above. If the event in question happens (or fails to happen) against the prediction of some line of reasoning, then it's not a foregone conclusion that the line of reasoning is sound and that the hypothesis it stems from must be false because of the event. We just as often use these inferential methods to test those consequential lines of reasoning as the hypotheses. Most of the formulations of any P(X|H) sound like, "If H were true then we should [not] expect to see X." If we observe X contrary to this, we don't get to say immediately that H must fail -- especially if we H with certainty. The connection purported between X and H is still on the table. In Jabba's argument, nothing is certain -- it's all guesswork. Thus he has no basis for knowing what part of the model is responsible for the errant observation.

This is how fringe theorists commonly use pseudo-mathematical notation to hide their assumptions and insist that others must gloss over them. Jabba's formulation of P(E|H) in his model is just such gibberish. It is, in its own way, just as absurd as your example above. Jabba just couches it in vague philosophical-sounding terms, the discussion of which he hopes we will wallow in endlessly. In easy-to-see fact, the contrary event only confirms what we know about his fantasy P(E|H) formulation. There's nothing wrong with H, but there is certainly something wrong with how Jabba says H should relate to E.
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 22nd June 2017, 04:00 PM   #71
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,708
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
This is how fringe theorists commonly use pseudo-mathematical notation to hide their assumptions and insist that others must gloss over them.
And, usually, entirely unconsciously.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon 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 22nd June 2017, 05:02 PM   #72
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 17,024
Jabba, do you realise that you have gone so far as to claim that on the condition that everyone ignores why you are wrong you are by default right?

Do you not see anything wrong with that?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon 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 22nd June 2017, 05:14 PM   #73
JoeBentley
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeBentley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 8,400
Variations on "If you assume I'm right I can therefore conclude that I am right" have been his primary argumentative style for years now.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Hating a bad thing does not make you good." - David Wong
JoeBentley 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 22nd June 2017, 05:23 PM   #74
Loss Leader
Would Be Ringing (if a bell)
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 24,125
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Dave,
- I think that's wrong.
- When an event is unlikely to happen given a particular hypothesis, it is potential evidence against the hypothesis, in that, it being evidence depends upon other conditions. Here, one of the conditions is that the "hypothesis predicts a wide variety of possible events, each of them individually unlikely."

Everything is "potential" evidence. My fingerprints are potential evidence that I broke into a Starbucks and stole one of those terrible CDs. Of course, first I'd have to actually break into a Starbucks and steal one of those terrible CDs. I won't, but my fingerprints still have the "potential" to be evidence.

The entire concept is just stupid.
__________________
I have the honor to be
Your Obdt. St

L. Leader
Loss Leader 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 22nd June 2017, 05:34 PM   #75
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 11,915
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
The more delicate contours of that problem might be that Jabba may think we need his admission of error in order for us to be confident in our judgment. This, like many fringe tactics, is a distortion of a common human behavior. [...]
Hmmm. Jabba may believe that a skeptic's obstinacy is the the only thing preventing his emotional biases from prevailing against critical thinking. It's a simplistic deduction, but it fits with everything he's posted the last 5 years.


Jabba, what is your rejoinder to this?
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave

Last edited by John Jones; 22nd June 2017 at 06:08 PM.
John Jones 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 22nd June 2017, 06:17 PM   #76
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,708
Originally Posted by John Jones View Post
Jabba, what is your rejoinder to this?
He'll be back.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon 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 22nd June 2017, 06:29 PM   #77
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 11,915
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
He'll be back.
How could I forget? He's also busy and misunderstood.
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave
John Jones 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 22nd June 2017, 06:56 PM   #78
JoeBentley
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeBentley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 8,400
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
The more delicate contours of that problem might be that Jabba may think we need his admission of error in order for us to be confident in our judgment. This, like many fringe tactics, is a distortion of a common human behavior. When confronted with our own errors, before admitting them we want not only to see the proof of error, but to reason for ourselves how it happened. If we can't do that -- specifically if we don't have the wherewithal to see how we erred -- we hold out hope to still be right. We figure that if it's hard for us to see how we err, it must be equally hard for others to see it and therefore we might not actually be wrong. Projecting our confusion onto others is one of several flavors of the same general class of defense mechanism.
At the point the most charitable interpretation of this whole mess is that Jabba is an extreme case of a person missing the factual correctness forest for the argumentative tries.

I've openly admitted that recently the whole internet style of debates in general has started to wear on me, with every discussion on the internet being at the mercy of some ongoing meta-debate about how to debate, a subtext which becomes the text in too many discussions.

In certain extreme cases it really does reach a tipping point where the "debate" becomes this stylized dance, a wizard duel of rules of points scoring and technicalities that are only tangentially related to any objective truths.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Hating a bad thing does not make you good." - David Wong
JoeBentley 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 22nd June 2017, 07:46 PM   #79
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 17,024
Originally Posted by John Jones View Post
How could I forget? He's also busy and misunderstood.
Don't forget befuddled old man routine. That always works.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon 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 22nd June 2017, 08:02 PM   #80
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,524
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
The entire concept is just stupid.
Agreed, and -- I have to remind Jabba -- covered already as one of the individually fatal flaws: Jabba doesn't understand what evidence is. "Potential" this-or-that seems to be one of Jabba's idioms. In his argument it seems to play the role of something that isn't actually there, but his critics are expected to behave as if it did.
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
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 07:29 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.