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

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

Notices


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.
Reply
Old 2nd March 2018, 01:32 PM   #161
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 72,392
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
It relies specifically on saying that all incarnations of Jabba are statistically equivalent events, even though elements of his description of a disembodied soul contradict that equivalence.
All elements contradict that equivalence.
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 02:48 PM   #162
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by jsfisher View Post
That formula does follow from the basic Bayes Theorem. However, you do not have a complementary hypothesis. The H you have is that of a materialistic reality. Immortality is not the complement of that. It is just one of the possibilities.

So, no, you cannot use that formula.
js,

- My complement included 8 different possibilities.
- In addition, my next version will assert the complement of OOFLam as it pertains only to me -- and thereby, reduce the number of possibilities in the complement.

- So far, no one at SUNY has contacted me -- I must have said too much about my idea...
__________________
"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 è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor

Last edited by Jabba; 2nd March 2018 at 03:03 PM.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 03:07 PM   #163
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
Oh, we made progress. Perhaps you didn't notice.

Perhaps it has existence outside a brain in ~OOFLam, but it is OOFLam you are trying to disprove, and you just agreed that whatever a soul is, it does not increase the likelihood of the brain existing, which means that ~OOFLam has at best a likelihood EQUAL to OOFLam.

Which part if this do you not agree with?

Hans
Hans,
- Please try again -- I don't understand your logic. Does it apply to my follow-up correction?
__________________
"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 è 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 03:11 PM   #164
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 21,178
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Hans,
- Please try again -- I don't understand your logic. Does it apply to my follow-up correction?
What correction?

Which part of my logic do you not understand?

Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.
MRC_Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 03:41 PM   #165
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,496
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
My complement included 8 different possibilities.
To be a complement it has to include all of them, including the ones you can't think of. Your answer indicates you don't know what "complement" means in this case.

Right now you have materialism and reincarnation. As jt512 showed us yesterday, there is a formulation for that. Or more simply, you can just arrive at P(R|J) and P(M|J) separately and take the ratio P(R|J)/P(M|J) as a valid comparison. The reason you don't do that is either because you don't know how, or because you know you're trying to hide a false dilemma.

Quote:
In addition, my next version will assert the complement of OOFLam as it pertains only to me...
"OOFLAM" is not a thing.

Specifically, as we have explained at length, the proposition that life is finite and singular is merely what would follow from the actual operative hypothesis. That hypothesis is materialism, and materialism is what you are talking about in your proof. But because you need the false dilemma in order for your proof to appear to succeed, you change horses from hypotheses to observables regardless of hypothesis. This is equivocation.

The complement of an observable outcome says nothing about how that outcome may or may not have come to be. And it says nothing about how the absence of the observable may or may not have come to be. That means your likelihoods would have to be completely speculative in both cases.

Quote:
So far, no one at SUNY has contacted me -- I must have said too much about my idea...
Meaning what, exactly?

Last edited by JayUtah; 2nd March 2018 at 03:48 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 07:47 PM   #166
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 72,392
Jabba, didn't you just make up the "1/10100" number?
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 08:22 PM   #167
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,952
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Hans,
- Please try again -- I don't understand your logic. Does it apply to my follow-up correction?
Well figure the fudge out there "Master of Effective Debate." It's not like you're gonna die so you can waste time.
__________________
"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 offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2018, 08:31 PM   #168
sackett
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 5,198
About SUNY: University departments receive communications from -- I musn't say cranks -- from time to time. I know this because I spent almost my entire life in higher education. The wisest response is silence. Sometimes, academics will reply by saying something like, "We don't feel qualified to evaluate the material you sent us." That's a way of telling the -- not a crank, I'm not using that word! -- that his effusion defies intelligent commentary.

Does that teach the -- godammit, crank! there, I said it! -- anything? Not usually. Hell, never. But it saves time.
__________________
Fill the seats of justice with good men; not so absolute in goodness as to forget what human frailty is. -- Thomas Jefferson

What region of the earth is not filled with our calamities? -- Virgil
sackett is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2018, 02:03 AM   #169
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 17,666
I suspect jabba is aiming for that wooest of ideas, the over soul . This is the woo idea that everyone has an over soul which intentionally incarnates and intentionally wipes all memory from the incarnation while the over soul itself retains memory of all incarnations.

This puts jabba way outside any Christianity and into total new age baloney.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2018, 02:32 AM   #170
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,164
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
I suspect jabba is aiming for that wooest of ideas, the over soul . This is the woo idea that everyone has an over soul which intentionally incarnates and intentionally wipes all memory from the incarnation while the over soul itself retains memory of all incarnations.

This puts jabba way outside any Christianity and into total new age baloney.

It also puts him firmly into pseudoscience.
__________________
"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

Last edited by Mojo; 3rd March 2018 at 02:34 AM. Reason: Fix link.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2018, 04:26 AM   #171
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 40,302
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
I suspect jabba is aiming for that wooest of ideas, the over soul . This is the woo idea that everyone has an over soul which intentionally incarnates and intentionally wipes all memory from the incarnation while the over soul itself retains memory of all incarnations.

This puts jabba way outside any Christianity and into total new age baloney.
That doesn't fit with his infinitely divided bucket of consciousness.
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2018, 09:06 AM   #172
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by jsfisher View Post
That formula does follow from the basic Bayes Theorem. However, you do not have a complementary hypothesis. The H you have is that of a materialistic reality. Immortality is not the complement of that. It is just one of the possibilities.

So, no, you cannot use that formula.
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
js,

- My complement included 8 different possibilities.
- In addition, my next version will assert the complement of OOFLam as it pertains only to me -- and thereby, reduce the number of possibilities in the complement...
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
To be a complement it has to include all of them, including the ones you can't think of. Your answer indicates you don't know what "complement" means in this case.
- Sorry.
I actually included 9 different possibilities.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Here's the latest version of my syllogism...


THE MATH OF MORTALITY
...
Re P(E|~H):
The probability (“likelihood”) of E given ~H, involves several specific hypothetical possibilities.
That only some of us have but one finite life.
That we each have numerous finite lives.
That only some of us have numerous finite lives.
That we each have an infinity of finite lives.
That only some of us have an infinity of finite lives.
That we each have an infinite life.
That only some of us have an infinite life.
That time isn’t what we think it is.
Some other explanation.
...
__________________
"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 è 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2018, 09:37 AM   #173
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 72,392
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Sorry.
I actually included 9 different possibilities.
Odd that you can find those posts of yours really quickly but can't remember someone else's post that you responded to in the same day.
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2018, 10:14 AM   #174
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,496
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
I actually included 9 different possibilities.
No, you included an admission that you couldn't think of all the possibilities. That means you don't have a complement. Pray tell your critics how to compute P(some other explanation) and P(evidence|some other explanation) for any class of problem, in some way that does not amount to mere guesswork or indirection. Statisticians around the globe are waiting for this profound bit of wisdom.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2018, 10:57 AM   #175
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
Oh, we made progress. Perhaps you didn't notice.

Perhaps it has existence outside a brain in ~OOFLam, but it is OOFLam you are trying to disprove, and you just agreed that whatever a soul is, it does not increase the likelihood of the brain existing, which means that ~OOFLam has at best a likelihood EQUAL to OOFLam.

Which part if this do you not agree with?

Hans
- "which means that ~OOFLam has at best a likelihood EQUAL to OOFLam."
- I don't understand how that follows.
- By "the brain," above, do you mean the same brain?
__________________
"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 è 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2018, 01:57 PM   #176
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,164
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Sorry.
I actually included 9 different possibilities.

Totally irrelevant. If you can say how many possibilities it includes, it isn't a complement.

You fail again.
__________________
"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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2018, 02:06 PM   #177
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 21,178
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- "which means that ~OOFLam has at best a likelihood EQUAL to OOFLam."
- I don't understand how that follows.
- By "the brain," above, do you mean the same brain?
Any brain.

.... You like numbers:

1) You perceive a self.

2) You have agreed that whether a product of the a brain or an occupant of a brain, the self needs a brain to be expressed.

3) You have agreed that the likelihood of a brain to exist is the same whether it produces a self or houses a self.

4) Therefore, a brain producing a self (OOFLam) is (at least) as likely to occur as a brain housing a self (~OOFLam). (This requires that the pairing of brain and self is a certainty.)

OK?

Now as for the likelihood of YOUR brain perceiving YOUR self NOW:

This is where the Texas sharpshooter comes in; you have, quite arbitrarily, chosen to examine YOU. You might have chosen to examine ANY sentient being that has ever existed or will ever exist in the universe. In all cases, once you choose a given being, the self that being will perceive is, of course, its own. Therefore, no matter what the likelihood of that beings existence, it's perception of it's own self is a given.

Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.
MRC_Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2018, 06:45 PM   #178
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by jsfisher View Post
That formula does follow from the basic Bayes Theorem. However, you do not have a complementary hypothesis. The H you have is that of a materialistic reality. Immortality is not the complement of that. It is just one of the possibilities...
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
js,
- My complement included 8 different possibilities.
- In addition, my next version will assert the complement of OOFLam as it pertains only to me -- and thereby, reduce the number of possibilities in the complement...
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
To be a complement it has to include all of them, including the ones you can't think of. Your answer indicates you don't know what "complement" means in this case...
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Sorry.
I actually included 9 different possibilities.
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Here's the latest version of my syllogism.

THE MATH OF MORTALITY...
Re P(E|~H):
The probability (“likelihood”) of E given ~H, involves several specific hypothetical possibilities.
That only some of us have but one finite life.
That we each have numerous finite lives.
That only some of us have numerous finite lives.
That we each have an infinity of finite lives.
That only some of us have an infinity of finite lives.
That we each have an infinite life.
That only some of us have an infinite life.
That time isn’t what we think it is.
Some other explanation...
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
No, you included an admission that you couldn't think of all the possibilities. That means you don't have a complement. Pray tell your critics how to compute P(some other explanation) and P(evidence|some other explanation) for any class of problem, in some way that does not amount to mere guesswork or indirection. Statisticians around the globe are waiting for this profound bit of wisdom.
- Isn't that what you meant when you said "including the ones you can't think of"?
__________________
"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 è 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2018, 06:47 PM   #179
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Totally irrelevant. If you can say how many possibilities it includes, it isn't a complement.

You fail again.
- I don't follow...
__________________
"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 è 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2018, 06:54 PM   #180
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
Any brain.

.... You like numbers:

1) You perceive a self.

2) You have agreed that whether a product of the a brain or an occupant of a brain, the self needs a brain to be expressed.

3) You have agreed that the likelihood of a brain to exist is the same whether it produces a self or houses a self.

4) Therefore, a brain producing a self (OOFLam) is (at least) as likely to occur as a brain housing a self (~OOFLam). (This requires that the pairing of brain and self is a certainty.)

OK?...
Hans,
- No.
- Re #2, only on this "earthly plain."
__________________
"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 è 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2018, 07:11 PM   #181
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,496
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Isn't that what you meant when you said "including the ones you can't think of"?
No it isn't.

Amazing how your willingness and ability to scour the thread for previous posts seems to miraculously manifest itself so selectively. So I expect you to quit whining when others expect you to do the same for them.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2018, 08:03 PM   #182
Loss Leader
Do you want to date my Avatar?
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 25,249
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Re #2, only on this "earthly plain."

Plane. P L A N E.

And you haven't aduced even the slightest hint of evidence that there is anything other than the material plane.

Also, the tenets of materialism under which you have to formulate half your equation don't allow for the existence of anything other than this earthly plane.

Also, all of your other arguments, numbers and conclusions are wrong.
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 02:10 AM   #183
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,164
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I don't follow...

The complement to anything is "everything else". It is completely defined by whatever it is a complement to.
__________________
"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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 02:26 AM   #184
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,164
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Hans,
- No.
- Re #2, only on this "earthly plain."

You have previously stated that the soul itself has no specific characteristics, and that all its characteristics, all the things that make it "you", are produced by the brain.
__________________
"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

Last edited by Mojo; 4th March 2018 at 02:50 AM.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 02:41 AM   #185
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 21,178
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Hans,
- No.
- Re #2, only on this "earthly plain."
Well, the earthly plane is what we are discussing. You have agreed that a soul does not make an earthly being more likely to exist.
In case you forgot, here:

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
Fine! You are free to think that. Does it make your current brain more likely to exist?

Hans
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- No.
Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.

Last edited by MRC_Hans; 4th March 2018 at 02:45 AM.
MRC_Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 05:06 AM   #186
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 72,392
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Isn't that what you meant when you said "including the ones you can't think of"?
Gee, I guess you can find those posts really easily, right?
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 08:11 AM   #187
jond
Illuminator
 
jond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,228
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Hans,
- No.
- Re #2, only on this "earthly plain."
Remember all the times you’ve been called out for trying to add things into the materialist model that do not belong? Right here is exhibit A.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 08:55 AM   #188
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,496
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
Well, the earthly plane is what we are discussing. You have agreed that a soul does not make an earthly being more likely to exist.
Specifically, the earthly plane is all we have data for. If someone agrees that the data isn't any more likely under his hypothesis than another, that statement can be expressed mathematically in terms of relative likelihood. Jabba has claimed that his earthly-plane existence is more likely by reincarnation. Then see how easy it is to get him to admit it isn't. And now he seems to realize he's been cornered yet again. Thus prepare yourself for, "But my claim is..." followed by a whole lot of faux befuddlement.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 08:58 AM   #189
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,496
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
The complement to anything is "everything else". It is completely defined by whatever it is a complement to.
That's why he insists on formulating his model in terms of observable outcome rather than hypotheses. If your model is ill-formed like that, you can hide a false dilemma so much easier.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 09:22 AM   #190
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 17,666
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Specifically, the earthly plane is all we have data for. If someone agrees that the data isn't any more likely under his hypothesis than another, that statement can be expressed mathematically in terms of relative likelihood. Jabba has claimed that his earthly-plane existence is more likely by reincarnation. Then see how easy it is to get him to admit it isn't. And now he seems to realize he's been cornered yet again. Thus prepare yourself for, "But my claim is..." followed by a whole lot of faux befuddlement.
Part true, and part not.

I think Jabba's claim revolves around attempting to assert that a soul is part and parcel of the materialist hypothesis. He is simply attempting to insert a soul into materialism.

What he seems to not understand for whatever reason, is that he is not required to accept the materialist hypothesis at all, but he is required to formulate it correctly even if he does not agree/accept it.

Jabba's contention seems to be a suppositional position, whereby all of us godless atheists really know there is a god/soul/reincarnation/cat but simply deny it on a willful basis.

I could well be wrong, but there seems no mythology he will not espouse in pursuit of that goal. Famously, the shroud of turin, a catholic emblem. But reincarnation, a catholic heresy, or a most christian heresy, or an islamic heresy.

At this point, Jabba has probably been a heretic for all established religions and plenty of fringe exemplars.

I wonder how it is possible to hold so many mutually exclusively contradictory positions and what might one gain from that?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 09:28 AM   #191
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,496
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Gee, I guess you can find those posts really easily, right?
Jabba's argument is nothing if not selective attention. Notice how he quotes only from the parts that seem to be in contradiction -- the quickie sound bites. But he reserves the right to skip over the lengthier posts that actually tell the whole story about how this sort of reasoning does take place.

It's even more ironic to note that while Jabba pontificates on the difference between probability and likelihood, his formulation is really only about probability. He doesn't show the ability to think in terms of likelihoods the way they're actually used -- only conditional probabilities where the complement is a strongly operative concept and all the hypotheses are mutually exclusive. It's a very simplistic, crude formulation -- the kind you'd expect from someone who only poorly recalls his partial exposure to the concepts, and that decades ago. Jsfisher was trying to get him to see that. :And I spend inordinate amounts of time in the past week trying to elaborate those concepts to Jabba. And what do we get? Jabba suddenly being able to dig up past posts and convince himself he's sprung a "gotcha!" trap.

Pointing out that a complement of a hypothesis must by definition include all other possibilities is not the same as saying that all those possibilities can be enumerated and tested for any given problem. The practical upshot of this is that real-world comparison of hypotheses other than the null doesn't rely on complementary reasoning. And in no way is the conundrum dispelled by a catch-all hypothesis. Merely acknowledging that one or more unknowable hypotheses remain in your formulation after you've done your best to enumerate them all doesn't cure the problem. Attempting to assign priors and likelihoods given data to such a catch-all predicate necessarily implies that the assignment can have no rational basis. That's why actual statisticians use a different method for reasoning of this kind. Jabba: "Do you agree that this is the right formula?" No, we don't agree. And he's been told why it's statistically wrong to agree. It relies on knowledge that can't be had.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 10:05 AM   #192
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,496
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
I think Jabba's claim revolves around attempting to assert that a soul is part and parcel of the materialist hypothesis. He is simply attempting to insert a soul into materialism.
Yes. I see it as Jabba trying to make "something like a soul" (but not actually called that) a necessary part of the data that all hypotheses have to explain.

Quote:
What he seems to not understand for whatever reason, is that he is not required to accept the materialist hypothesis at all, but he is required to formulate it correctly even if he does not agree/accept it.
He has to reckon P(E|M) as if materialism (M) is true, and he gets to reckon P(E|R) as if reincarnation is true. But he doesn't get to define E in terms of all the speculative stuff he's attached to it. E is merely the observation of an event not including suppositions of how it happened or what else "would have to be" part of the event (yet remains unobserved) if a certain hypothesis had been responsible for it. One of the fatal flaws in Jabba's argument is that he doesn't understand the parts of a statistical inference and the roles they play. That's the sort of deficiency that's expected when someone has only treated the subject academically (and perhaps not really done well in the class) and has never actually had to use those tools in practice.

Quote:
Jabba's contention seems to be a suppositional position, whereby all of us godless atheists really know there is a god/soul/reincarnation/cat but simply deny it on a willful basis.
I don't think it's anything that noble. I think his supposition is that all us godless atheists really know he's a mathematical genius who has proved conclusively the existence of an immortal soul, but we deny it willfully because we just can't stomach the prospect of being beaten at our own game by a non-skeptic. A substantial part of the social-engineering aspects of his argument is the victim complex. He claims we're being unfair and uncivil to him personally, not necessarily to some idea or ideology.

Quote:
I could well be wrong, but there seems no mythology he will not espouse in pursuit of that goal.
True, but I don't see where any of his arguments actually require belief on his part. He's not trying to prove something about his god. He's trying to prove something about atheists and skeptics. It doesn't matter what ends up being right as long as skeptics are shown clearly to be wrong. Rebuttals that allege hypocrisy matter only if he has professed some specific belief and only if the fact of that belief (not the fact of what is believed) bears on his argument. It's theoretically possible to prove reincarnation is a better hypothesis without needing first to express a belief in it.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 10:27 AM   #193
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by jsfisher View Post
That formula does follow from the basic Bayes Theorem. However, you do not have a complementary hypothesis. The H you have is that of a materialistic reality. Immortality is not the complement of that. It is just one of the possibilities.
So, no, you cannot use that formula.
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
js,
- My complement included 8 different possibilities.
- In addition, my next version will assert the complement of OOFLam as it pertains only to me -- and thereby, reduce the number of possibilities in the complement...
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
To be a complement it has to include all of them, including the ones you can't think of. Your answer indicates you don't know what "complement" means in this case...
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Sorry.
I actually included 9 different possibilities.
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Here's the latest version of my syllogism.
THE MATH OF MORTALITY...
Re P(E|~H):
The probability (“likelihood”) of E given ~H, involves several specific hypothetical possibilities.
That only some of us have but one finite life.
That we each have numerous finite lives.
That only some of us have numerous finite lives.
That we each have an infinity of finite lives.
That only some of us have an infinity of finite lives.
That we each have an infinite life.
That only some of us have an infinite life.
That time isn’t what we think it is.
Some other explanation.
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
No, you included an admission that you couldn't think of all the possibilities. That means you don't have a complement. Pray tell your critics how to compute P(some other explanation) and P(evidence|some other explanation) for any class of problem, in some way that does not amount to mere guesswork or indirection. Statisticians around the globe are waiting for this profound bit of wisdom.
Jay,
- But how else could I refer to the ones I can't think of?
__________________
"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 è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor

Last edited by zooterkin; 4th March 2018 at 11:22 AM. Reason: Fixing tags
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 10:29 AM   #194
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,496
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
But how else could I refer to the ones I can't think of?
Read my posts, including the long ones you don't feel it necessary to read. I literally answered this question just a few minutes ago.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 10:37 AM   #195
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Read my posts, including the long ones you don't feel it necessary to read. I literally answered this question just a few minutes ago.
- Yeah. For some reason, I didn't realize that my previous attempt had been published -- I thought that I had some how deleted it -- so I went through the details again...
__________________
"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 è 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 10:41 AM   #196
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,496
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Yeah. For some reason, I didn't realize that my previous attempt had been published -- I thought that I had some how deleted it -- so I went through the details again...
If you have time post this sort of irrelevant running commentary, you have time to read what I've written for your benefit. Please quit stalling and address my posts.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 11:18 AM   #197
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
To be a complement it has to include all of them, including the ones you can't think of. Your answer indicates you don't know what "complement" means in this case...
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Here's the latest version of my syllogism.
THE MATH OF MORTALITY...
Re P(E|~H):
The probability (“likelihood”) of E given ~H, involves several specific hypothetical possibilities.
That only some of us have but one finite life.
That we each have numerous finite lives.
That only some of us have numerous finite lives.
That we each have an infinity of finite lives.
That only some of us have an infinity of finite lives.
That we each have an infinite life.
That only some of us have an infinite life.
That time isn’t what we think it is.
Some other explanation.
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Sorry.
I actually included 9 different possibilities.
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
No, you included an admission that you couldn't think of all the possibilities. That means you don't have a complement. Pray tell your critics how to compute P(some other explanation) and P(evidence|some other explanation) for any class of problem, in some way that does not amount to mere guesswork or indirection. Statisticians around the globe are waiting for this profound bit of wisdom.
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Isn't that what you meant when you said "including the ones you can't think of"?
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
No it isn't.
Amazing how your willingness and ability to scour the thread for previous posts seems to miraculously manifest itself so selectively. So I expect you to quit whining when others expect you to do the same for them.
- How would you refer to the possibilities you can't think of? I don't have time to read and understand your long posts. It shouldn't take you much time to specifically point out the post you're referring to.
__________________
"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 è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor

Last edited by Agatha; 5th March 2018 at 09:08 AM. Reason: Fixing missing tags
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 11:21 AM   #198
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,496
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
How would you refer to the possibilities you can't think of?
I wouldn't. You obviously haven't read my posts. Please remedy that problem before proceeding further.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 11:31 AM   #199
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
I wouldn't. You obviously haven't read my posts. Please remedy that problem before proceeding further.
- No.
- I'll have to leave you behind and answer only those participants who are willing to be more specific. Though, I probably will respond to simple accusations or questions from you -- until you go back to telling me to look up something for myself.
- If I tried to look up whatever you tell me to, I wouldn't be able to answer anybody else.
__________________
"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 è 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2018, 11:35 AM   #200
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Originally Posted by godless dave View Post
I don't see where you've made any new claims. As before, I disagree with your whole approach. I think you are misusing Bayes Theorem.
Dave,
- Please explain how you think that I'm misusing Bayes Theorem.
__________________
"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 è 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

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 02:23 PM.
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.