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

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


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 dylan farrow , mia farrow , sexual misconduct charges , woody allen

Reply
Old 6th February 2014, 10:39 AM   #361
Dissolution
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,306
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
And by saying this, he was implying that we should pity the state of poor beleaguered rich white people who are so unfairly attacked by the "A+/JSW party". Which again, is so stupid that it earned him a slap. It's funny that his defenders have responded by accusing me of supporting a dual system of justice in which rich white men deserve no trial, or that I support some form of bigotry, when his original comment reeked of white privilege.

And it's especially funny since I support Woody Allen on this.
No, he was implying that we should pity the utter lack of critical thinking and skepticism that's infested the A+ forum and similar failed Social Justice loons.
Bigots Against Bigotry.
Dissolution 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 6th February 2014, 12:09 PM   #362
Tsukasa Buddha
Other (please write in)
 
Tsukasa Buddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,302
Here's a nice factual timeline going back through the dramascape.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/entert...986_story.html
__________________
As cultural anthropologists have always said "human culture" = "human nature". You might as well put a fish on the moon to test how it "swims naturally" without the "influence of water". -Earthborn
Tsukasa Buddha 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 6th February 2014, 01:07 PM   #363
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha View Post
Here's a nice factual timeline going back through the dramascape.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/entert...986_story.html
Originally Posted by article
FEBRUARY 1992:

Farrow gives Allen a Valentine with a photograph of her and some of her children; a steak knife is stuck into Farrow’s heart, covered with a photo of Soon-Yi, and meat skewers are stuck in the chests of the children. (The card will be displayed on CBS’ ”60 Minutes.”)
Jesus. this made me look up the 60 Minutes episode:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


Woody speaking his side of the story.

The Valentine Card:
__________________
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” – Christopher Hitchens.
TeapotCavalry 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 6th February 2014, 01:21 PM   #364
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Originally Posted by TeapotCavalry View Post
Jesus. this made me look up the 60 Minutes episode:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


Woody speaking his side of the story.

The Valentine Card:
She's not mentally ill at all. No sir. A lot of people send cards like this. I know I have!
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer 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 6th February 2014, 01:27 PM   #365
DragonLady
Illuminator
 
DragonLady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,590
Originally Posted by TeapotCavalry View Post

The Valentine Card:
Run, Woody, Run!!!
__________________
http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=2499

“She would be half a planet away, floating in a turquoise sea, dancing by moonlight to flamenco guitar.” ~ Janet Fitch

The Gweat and Tewwible Winged One
DragonLady 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 6th February 2014, 01:35 PM   #366
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
She's not mentally ill at all. No sir.
She's just passionate
__________________
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” – Christopher Hitchens.
TeapotCavalry 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 6th February 2014, 01:41 PM   #367
bumlet5
Indescribable
 
bumlet5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,366
There is a huge difference between being skeptical about ghosts and being skeptical about moletation.

When someone says that they were walking down the street and felt a gust of wind, you don't question that. When someone says the waitress at the pizza place was mean, you don't question that. Why? Because gusts of wind and mean waitresses exist. It's not a stretch of the imagination to believe that someone experienced them.

Molestation does exist. We know it happens. Why is it that you require more than someone's word to believe them about this topic specifically? This is not a court of law, in which I completely understand when the attitude is "This person's life can be seriously affected. We have to be really freaking sure they did it."

When someone says they've seen a ghost it's much more understandable to want physical proof of something that's never been proven to exist.
__________________

"I'm a soundwave tsunami, vocal origami, hijack the mic and it's not like anyone could stop me." -mc chris
"I've seen so much death" <("<) (>")> <("<) (>")> <("<) (>")> -Nathan Fillion
bumlet5 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 6th February 2014, 01:50 PM   #368
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Originally Posted by bumlet5 View Post
Molestation does exist. We know it happens. Why is it that you require more than someone's word to believe them about this topic specifically?
If a friend told me privately that their ex-husband, who they hate with a passion, molested their child, I would believe them. Or at least pretend to. "Oh my god, that's terrible! Let me know if you need someone to talk to...".

If that same friend wrote a letter to the NY Times, telling the world that their ex-husband, who they hate with a passion, molested their child, I would tend not to believe them, because now spite has entered into the equation, and it taints their testimony.

Originally Posted by bumlet5 View Post
This is not a court of law, in which I completely understand when the attitude is "This person's life can be seriously affected. We have to be really freaking sure they did it."
Do you think a letter in the NY Times doesn't affect someone's life?
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer

Last edited by The Central Scrutinizer; 6th February 2014 at 01:52 PM.
The Central Scrutinizer 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 6th February 2014, 01:55 PM   #369
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,773
Originally Posted by bumlet5 View Post
There is a huge difference between being skeptical about ghosts and being skeptical about moletation.

When someone says that they were walking down the street and felt a gust of wind, you don't question that. When someone says the waitress at the pizza place was mean, you don't question that. Why? Because gusts of wind and mean waitresses exist. It's not a stretch of the imagination to believe that someone experienced them.

Molestation does exist. We know it happens. Why is it that you require more than someone's word to believe them about this topic specifically? This is not a court of law, in which I completely understand when the attitude is "This person's life can be seriously affected. We have to be really freaking sure they did it."

When someone says they've seen a ghost it's much more understandable to want physical proof of something that's never been proven to exist.
Only if you don't live in a world where people lie, false accusations/memories never happen and people don't do terrible things in the name of revenge. It's easy to just believe anything that comes down the pike as long as you don't care about the fall out from such beliefs.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak 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 6th February 2014, 02:00 PM   #370
desertgal
Illuminator
 
desertgal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,198
Originally Posted by bumlet5 View Post
There is a huge difference between being skeptical about ghosts and being skeptical about moletation.

When someone says that they were walking down the street and felt a gust of wind, you don't question that. When someone says the waitress at the pizza place was mean, you don't question that. Why? Because gusts of wind and mean waitresses exist. It's not a stretch of the imagination to believe that someone experienced them.

Molestation does exist. We know it happens. Why is it that you require more than someone's word to believe them about this topic specifically? This is not a court of law, in which I completely understand when the attitude is "This person's life can be seriously affected. We have to be really freaking sure they did it."

When someone says they've seen a ghost it's much more understandable to want physical proof of something that's never been proven to exist.
Because it's a serious accusation to make. I would never say that I don't believe based on their word alone, but I think it's fair to suspend judgment if you don't know the details, or the details don't add up. As a survivor of incest, I would never dismiss someone's claim of molestation out of hand...but I just as surely wouldn't immediately believe such a serious accusation about the alleged perpetrator without a little more to go on.
__________________
"It's obvious that you seem to be threatened by me for some reason and I find that extremely amusing." - Jodie
desertgal 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 6th February 2014, 02:06 PM   #371
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,317
Originally Posted by bumlet5 View Post
When someone says that they were walking down the street and felt a gust of wind, you don't question that. When someone says the waitress at the pizza place was mean, you don't question that. Why? Because gusts of wind and mean waitresses exist. It's not a stretch of the imagination to believe that someone experienced them.
It depends. Do I know this person saying the waitress is mean, or not? Are there consequences for me or anyone else from believing this? Do multiple witnesses say that the incident where the waitress was mean never happened? Was the incident with the meanness investigated and problems with the story found? Was the meanness of the waitress actually raised by this persons father who was in the middle of a bitter divorce with the waitress?

If I was pressured to get the waitress fired, I think I would start to engage my scepticism, because now my laziness/politeness driven credulity has consequences.
shuttlt 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 6th February 2014, 02:06 PM   #372
Beth
Philosopher
 
Beth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,598
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
Only if you don't live in a world where people lie, false accusations/memories never happen and people don't do terrible things in the name of revenge. It's easy to just believe anything that comes down the pike as long as you don't care about the fall out from such beliefs.

The race goes not always to swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet.

While it's true that false accusations/memories happen, they are a small percentage of such accusations.
__________________
Beth
"You are not the stuff of which you are made."
Richard Dawkins, July 2005, 10:45

http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_daw..._universe.html
Beth 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 6th February 2014, 02:24 PM   #373
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,773
Originally Posted by Beth View Post
The race goes not always to swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet.

While it's true that false accusations/memories happen, they are a small percentage of such accusations.
And even when you are exonerated by an investigation team that specializes in these cases and they say it is a false memory /accusation, people still won't believe it.

Thanks for trying though.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak 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 6th February 2014, 02:26 PM   #374
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by Beth View Post
The race goes not always to swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet.

While it's true that false accusations/memories happen, they are a small percentage of such accusations.
So, statistically, Allen is guilty. Not sure how reasonable it is to take this approach, though.

Up the thread, someone mentioned a wild idea of taking each case individually. I find this a much better approach.

ETA: But while we're talking statistics:

Originally Posted by wiki
Studies of child abuse allegations suggest that the overall rate of false accusation is under 10%.[1][2][3][4] Of the allegations determined to be false, only a small portion originated with the child, the studies showed; most false allegations originated with an adult bringing the accusations on behalf of a child, and of those, a large majority occurred in the context of divorce and child-custody battles.[1][5]They may also have occurred when someone was getting back at someone else, if they get rejected for a promotion (for example) or to cover up an affair in cultures that frown on extramarital sex.
(bolding mine)

Seems to almost exactly describe the Allen-Farrow case. Maybe Allen knew this and abused his... statistical advantage, so that no-one would believe Farrow.
__________________
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” – Christopher Hitchens.

Last edited by TeapotCavalry; 6th February 2014 at 02:44 PM.
TeapotCavalry 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 6th February 2014, 02:29 PM   #375
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
It depends. Do I know this person saying the waitress is mean, or not? Are there consequences for me or anyone else from believing this? Do multiple witnesses say that the incident where the waitress was mean never happened? Was the incident with the meanness investigated and problems with the story found? Was the meanness of the waitress actually raised by this persons father who was in the middle of a bitter divorce with the waitress?

If I was pressured to get the waitress fired, I think I would start to engage my scepticism, because now my laziness/politeness driven credulity has consequences.
I'm confused. In your parable, is the waitress named Dylan or Mia?
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer 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 6th February 2014, 02:44 PM   #376
Beth
Philosopher
 
Beth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,598
Originally Posted by TeapotCavalry View Post
So, statistically, Allen is guilty. Not sure how reasonable it is to take this approach, though.

Up the thread, someone mentioned a wild idea of taking each case individually. I find this a much better approach.
No, statistics don't tell us about the outcome of any particular case. I agree that taking each case individually is a better idea. But when there's no definitive evidence, as in this case, it seems more reasonable to take the side with the higher probability of being true....just like you would bet on the fastest person to win the race despite recognizing that he/she isn't necessarily going to win.
__________________
Beth
"You are not the stuff of which you are made."
Richard Dawkins, July 2005, 10:45

http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_daw..._universe.html
Beth 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 6th February 2014, 02:58 PM   #377
jiggeryqua
Illuminator
 
jiggeryqua's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,107
Originally Posted by Beth View Post
No, statistics don't tell us about the outcome of any particular case. I agree that taking each case individually is a better idea. But when there's no definitive evidence, as in this case, it seems more reasonable to take the side with the higher probability of being true....just like you would bet on the fastest person to win the race despite recognizing that he/she isn't necessarily going to win.
Yes, that's the most appropriate metaphor for molestation accusations. Gambling.
__________________
"What follows is ever closely linked to what precedes; it is not a procession of isolated events, merely obeying the laws of sequence, but a rational continuity." - Marcus Aurelius Antoninus
jiggeryqua 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 6th February 2014, 03:07 PM   #378
colander
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,780
Originally Posted by desertgal View Post
I call it an unsubstantiated claim.

That doesn't strike you as odd? Three women-mothers all, presumably-allegedly watch a man do this, and all they do in response is take a bottle of lotion away from him (which, sure, that'll get him to stop what he was supposedly doing, uh-huh) and ask him how he wants to be remembered as a father?

Speaking as a mother, that seems to be a rather mild, and odd, reaction to a perverse action. If I were standing there watching my husband do the same to a daughter of ours, my reaction would definitely be more aggressive. I think other mothers here would say the same.

It doesn't ring true.
Yeah, you're right. Obviously, Mia Farrow must have put a brainwash hex on her mother and sister to make them believe it happened but it actually didn't happen. We know that's how things really went down because you're a mother and don't believe their story, so that means it isn't true. Awesome work.
colander 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 6th February 2014, 03:11 PM   #379
jiggeryqua
Illuminator
 
jiggeryqua's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,107
Originally Posted by colander View Post
Yeah, you're right. Obviously, Mia Farrow must have put a brainwash hex on her mother and sister to make them believe it happened but it actually didn't happen. We know that's how things really went down because you're a mother and don't believe their story, so that means it isn't true. Awesome work.
Have we heard from her mother and sister?
__________________
"What follows is ever closely linked to what precedes; it is not a procession of isolated events, merely obeying the laws of sequence, but a rational continuity." - Marcus Aurelius Antoninus
jiggeryqua 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 6th February 2014, 03:11 PM   #380
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,317
Originally Posted by Beth View Post
While it's true that false accusations/memories happen, they are a small percentage of such accusations.
1. I'm not aware of any useful data to base an estimate of the percentage on and off the top of my head I can't think how one would go about gathering data to find out. Could you point me in the direction of what you are basing this on?

2. Do you think it is a small percentage of allogations where people who were there dispute that the events happened? How about the impact of all the other known facts of the case - the accused was already hated by the people accusing him during a bitter divorce/custody battle? It seems to me that these and other facts of the case will have a huge, but unquantifiable, impact on the, unknown, base likelihood that the allogations are false.
shuttlt 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 6th February 2014, 03:16 PM   #381
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by Beth View Post
No, statistics don't tell us about the outcome of any particular case. I agree that taking each case individually is a better idea. But when there's no definitive evidence, as in this case, it seems more reasonable to take the side with the higher probability of being true....just like you would bet on the fastest person to win the race despite recognizing that he/she isn't necessarily going to win.
I understand what you're saying. But, for one, how would that jibe with the presumption of innocence principle? He's innocent, yet probably guilty?

How about I start betting that every black person that is arrested is more likely to end up in prison compared to a white person. So the next black man that gets arrested - he's probably done the crime. But hey, that's just the winning horse.
__________________
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” – Christopher Hitchens.
TeapotCavalry 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 6th February 2014, 03:18 PM   #382
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,317
Originally Posted by Beth View Post
No, statistics don't tell us about the outcome of any particular case. I agree that taking each case individually is a better idea. But when there's no definitive evidence, as in this case, it seems more reasonable to take the side with the higher probability of being true....just like you would bet on the fastest person to win the race despite recognizing that he/she isn't necessarily going to win.
But to do that we have to throw all the facts of the case in the bin apart from the fact that he has been accused. Where does that leave us? We believe all allogations of abuse regardless of witnesses to the contrary, physical evidence, plausibility of the story, etc.... How many cases will there be definitive evidence of innocence and what form could that definitive evidence take?
shuttlt 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 6th February 2014, 03:21 PM   #383
colander
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,780
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
2. Do you think it is a small percentage of allogations where people who were there dispute that the events happened? How about the impact of all the other known facts of the case - the accused was already hated by the people accusing him during a bitter divorce/custody battle? It seems to me that these and other facts of the case will have a huge, but unquantifiable, impact on the, unknown, base likelihood that the allogations are false.
I don't see why you are according more probability weight to the possibility "she hates him so she is falsely accusing him of doing terrible things" than to the rather more mundane possibility "she hates him because he does terrible things".

Last edited by colander; 6th February 2014 at 03:22 PM.
colander 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 6th February 2014, 03:27 PM   #384
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by colander View Post
I don't see why you are according more probability weight to the possibility "she hates him so she is falsely accusing him of doing terrible things" than to the rather more mundane possibility "she hates him because he does terrible things".
These are not mutually exclusive alternatives you know. We can speculate that if she hates him, it's because of dating/photographing/marrying/etc Soon-Yi (that's the terrible thing), which Allen admitted most likely is the case, and she's falsely accusing him of doing terrbile things. See, one theory to explain it all. Occam for the win!
__________________
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” – Christopher Hitchens.

Last edited by TeapotCavalry; 6th February 2014 at 03:29 PM.
TeapotCavalry 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 6th February 2014, 03:32 PM   #385
colander
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,780
Originally Posted by TeapotCavalry View Post
I understand what you're saying. But, for one, how would that jibe with the presumption of innocence principle? He's innocent, yet probably guilty?
"Presumption of innocence" is a thought construction we instruct jurors to act from in a criminal trial. It is not a belief that we are obligated to hold about anyone ever accused of anything, ever. If it were, police officers would never be allowed to detain people, parents would not be able to discipline their children for misbehaving while they weren't looking, and prosecutors would never be able to argue their case during trials.
colander 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 6th February 2014, 03:35 PM   #386
colander
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,780
Originally Posted by TeapotCavalry View Post
These are not mutually exclusive alternatives you know. We can speculate that if she hates him, it's because of dating/photographing/marrying/etc Soon-Yi (that's the terrible thing), which Allen admitted most likely is the case, and she's falsely accusing him of doing terrbile things. See, one theory to explain it all. Occam for the win!
Why do you think that is any more likely a possibility than "Woody Allen habitually conducts sexual affairs that are terrible"?

Last edited by colander; 6th February 2014 at 03:36 PM.
colander 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 6th February 2014, 03:36 PM   #387
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,317
Originally Posted by colander View Post
I don't see why you are according more probability weight to the possibility "she hates him so she is falsely accusing him of doing terrible things" than to the rather more mundane possibility "she hates him because he does terrible things".
You are misquoting me. I said "the accused was already hated by the people accusing him during a bitter divorce/custody battle". Woody was already hated by Mia, and the other people backing the accusation before it came out. I agree with you that if the accusation is true the daughter may very well have hated him for other reasons. That has nothing to do with the argument I was making though.

Could you address my argument?
shuttlt 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 6th February 2014, 03:42 PM   #388
colander
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,780
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
You are misquoting me. I said "the accused was already hated by the people accusing him during a bitter divorce/custody battle". Woody was already hated by Mia, and the other people backing the accusation before it came out. I agree with you that if the accusation is true the daughter may very well have hated him for other reasons. That has nothing to do with the argument I was making though.

Could you address my argument?
I haven't seen any evidence that that Allen was hated by any of the other witnesses to his behavior before they claimed to have witnessed his behavior. Are you telling me that you think it is more likely that multiple people conspired to concoct lies about Woody Allen because they hate him for some unspecified, unrelated reasons than that multiple people all saw him doing things that were improper? Because that is the only way your Bayesian argument can hold weight.

Last edited by colander; 6th February 2014 at 03:43 PM.
colander 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 6th February 2014, 03:44 PM   #389
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,317
Originally Posted by colander View Post
Why do you think that is any more likely a possibility than "Woody Allen habitually conducts sexual affairs that are terrible"?
Does he? I can see that he hurt everybody around him by marrying his girlfriends adopted daughter, but I can't think of any other affairs. What ones are you thinking about. I don't know that much about Woody Allens private life, so I could easily be ignorant.

I can think of at least as many sexual affairs that Mia had that could be described as terrible as I can for Woody Allen.
shuttlt 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 6th February 2014, 03:49 PM   #390
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,317
Originally Posted by colander View Post
I haven't seen any evidence that that Allen was hated by any of the other witnesses to his behavior before they claimed to have witnessed his behavior. Are you telling me that you think it is more likely that multiple people conspired to concoct lies about Woody Allen because they hate him for some unspecified, unrelated reasons than that multiple people all saw him doing things that were improper? Because that is the only way your Bayesian argument can hold weight.
Didn't the accusation come after Mia found out about his relationship with the adopted daughter and during the whole divorce custody thing. Are you telling me people weren't a bit annoyed with him? Mia wasn't annoyed? The people around Mia weren't annoyed?

Which people are you thinking of who witnessed all this and weren't pissed at Woody Allen?
shuttlt 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 6th February 2014, 03:52 PM   #391
colander
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,780
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
Does he? I can see that he hurt everybody around him by marrying his girlfriends adopted daughter, but I can't think of any other affairs. What ones are you thinking about. I don't know that much about Woody Allens private life, so I could easily be ignorant.
I am talking about the people who said that they witnessed him fingering Dylan and the person who said that she walked in on him with his head in Dylan's lap. I would not consider those things to be very proper and they seem rather sexual to me.

Since you agree that they might dislike Allen if they really witnessed those things, it follows that the fact of them disliking him cannot reasonably be said to constitute evidence that they didn't witness those things.

Quote:
I can think of at least as many sexual affairs that Mia had that could be described as terrible as I can for Woody Allen.
This is a complete non-sequitur. Mia Farrow could be the biggest bitch and the cheatingest whore slut in the whole entire universe and it wouldn't make it any less likely that she happened to date someone who turned out to be a child molester.

Last edited by colander; 6th February 2014 at 03:56 PM.
colander 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 6th February 2014, 04:00 PM   #392
jiggeryqua
Illuminator
 
jiggeryqua's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,107
Isn't all this "I want to believe X, so I view everything through the lens of X, giving undue prominence to stuff that supports my view and spurning anything that might begin to influence my view" the sort of thing that this place isn't about?
__________________
"What follows is ever closely linked to what precedes; it is not a procession of isolated events, merely obeying the laws of sequence, but a rational continuity." - Marcus Aurelius Antoninus
jiggeryqua 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 6th February 2014, 04:05 PM   #393
colander
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,780
Originally Posted by jiggeryqua View Post
Isn't all this "I want to believe X, so I view everything through the lens of X, giving undue prominence to stuff that supports my view and spurning anything that might begin to influence my view" the sort of thing that this place isn't about?
I don't know, jiggeryqua. How do you justify ignoring testimony from multiple witnesses who saw Allen behaving improperly towards Dylan? Did you just really enjoy Bananas?
colander 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 6th February 2014, 04:11 PM   #394
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by colander View Post
Why do you think that is any more likely a possibility than "Woody Allen habitually conducts sexual affairs that are terrible"?
Well that seems to explain more anecdotes and circumstantial tidbits that's known to the public. But that's just my perspective if we're talking probabilities. In truth, I am unconvinced either way and the most compelling evidence for me against Allen is judge Wilk's assessments.

Originally Posted by colander View Post
"Presumption of innocence" is a thought construction we instruct jurors to act from in a criminal trial. It is not a belief that we are obligated to hold about anyone ever accused of anything, ever.
That's a very unnerving philosophy and has been addressed here before. I don't think not being in court gives us a free pass to not be critical and not apply the presumption of innocence. Presumption of innocence is, after all, a result of critical contemplation of guilt and burden of proof. We deem the imprisonment or ostracism of an innocent man more troubling than a victim not having justice.

It's actually pretty important. More a human rights thing, and less of a pirate code thing, which as we know is indeed more like guidelines. But somehow some people seem to think the latter (not pointing at you, but there was a link to a blogpost here not long ago).


Originally Posted by colander View Post
If it were, police officers would never be allowed to detain people, parents would not be able to discipline their children for misbehaving while they weren't looking, and prosecutors would never be able to argue their case during trials.
Any of that simply doesn't follow in any logical sense.
__________________
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” – Christopher Hitchens.

Last edited by TeapotCavalry; 6th February 2014 at 04:28 PM. Reason: typo
TeapotCavalry 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 6th February 2014, 04:14 PM   #395
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,317
Originally Posted by colander View Post
I am talking about the people who said that they witnessed him fingering Dylan and the person who said that she walked in on him with his head in Dylan's lap. I would not consider those things to be very proper and they seem rather sexual to me.
Well, the fingering thing is supposedly witnessed by Mia's mother and sister. Personally I find the article very confusing. It isn't clear to me whether Mia, her mother and her sister were interviewed... We have Woody Allens words, Mia's sisters words and Mia's mothers words. Who is telling the interviewer who said what? All the people involved? Some of them? One of them? In any case of course these people were angry when they made the accusations. Woody had cheated on Mia and was fighting her for the kids.

The lap thing is from one of Mia's staff. Again, nobody said anything until everybody was angry with Woody, did they? We also have a quote from one of her staff saying they were pressured by Mia to say negative things about Woody.

Originally Posted by colander View Post
Since you agree that they might dislike Allen because they witnessed those things, it follows that the fact of them disliking him cannot reasonably serve as evidence that they didn't witness those things.
So they disliked him, but Mia decided to keep seeing Woody for several years and let him adopt some of her children? Also, you are wrong, it doesn't follow.

Originally Posted by colander View Post
This is a complete non-sequitur. Mia Farrow could be the biggest bitch and the cheatingest whore slut in the whole entire universe and it wouldn't make it any less likely that she happened to date someone who turned out to be a child molester.
Well, her brother is a child molester and she's friends with a child molester, so she certainly has rotten luck. Again though, you either fail to understand or deliberately misrepresent my point.

Last edited by shuttlt; 6th February 2014 at 05:39 PM.
shuttlt 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 6th February 2014, 04:24 PM   #396
jiggeryqua
Illuminator
 
jiggeryqua's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,107
Originally Posted by colander View Post
I don't know, jiggeryqua. How do you justify ignoring testimony from multiple witnesses who saw Allen behaving improperly towards Dylan? Did you just really enjoy Bananas?
I did quite enjoy Bananas (and still enjoy bananas). Meanwhile, I don't justify ignoring testimony. Your insinuating that I do is just part of the problem I was talking about in the post you quoted.
__________________
"What follows is ever closely linked to what precedes; it is not a procession of isolated events, merely obeying the laws of sequence, but a rational continuity." - Marcus Aurelius Antoninus
jiggeryqua 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 6th February 2014, 04:25 PM   #397
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
Didn't the accusation come after Mia found out about his relationship with the adopted daughter and during the whole divorce custody thing.
According to Allen, in December 1991, Mia wrote a "glowing affidavit" that Allen was a "loving, caring and attentive father" when they were adopting Dylan. That was a month before Mia found out about the affair with Soon-Yi. Then the child molestation charges followed.
__________________
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” – Christopher Hitchens.
TeapotCavalry 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 6th February 2014, 05:41 PM   #398
Beth
Philosopher
 
Beth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,598
Originally Posted by jiggeryqua View Post
Have we heard from her mother and sister?
IIRC, the article said that the author of the Vanity Fair article had conducted interviews with more than 2 dozen people, more than 15 of them speaking on the record. I think that Mia's mother and sister were among them.

Originally Posted by jiggeryqua View Post
Yes, that's the most appropriate metaphor for molestation accusations. Gambling.
It's a metaphor and reasonable appropriate IMO. I wasn't trying for the best possible analogy, just one that would serve to communicate my point. I'm not sure if it was successful though.

Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
1. I'm not aware of any useful data to base an estimate of the percentage on and off the top of my head I can't think how one would go about gathering data to find out. Could you point me in the direction of what you are basing this on?
The statistics I've seen that I find credible lie around 5%. I'd find an estimated upper bound of 10% reasonable. I'll let you google for estimates of false crime reports. Let me know if find anything approaching as estimate of 50/50.

Quote:
2. Do you think it is a small percentage of allogations where people who were there dispute that the events happened? How about the impact of all the other known facts of the case - the accused was already hated by the people accusing him during a bitter divorce/custody battle? It seems to me that these and other facts of the case will have a huge, but unquantifiable, impact on the, unknown, base likelihood that the allogations are false.
Absolutely. Unfortunately, there are many of them and they don't all point in the same direction. I've wasted most of today reading about this case. I find both scenarios plausible. His creepy behavior towards Dylan as a young child was well documented if the Vanity Fair article is credible on that point. Apparently there was a rule that Allen was not to be left alone with Dylan ever. Apparently, his behavior was concerning to others. Everything I read about this case is very consistent with an incidence of sexual assault.

While I don't know any pedophiles personally, I do know the daughter of one. I found out because her sister-in-law, despite having been warned, left her young daughter alone with him for 15 minutes. The poor girl was assaulted and her grandfather went to prison for it and the ugly truth that he had molested all of his daughters was revealed to the rest of the world.

OTOH, Mia was understandably and grievously hurt by what his affair her daughter. I've known women to claim sexual abuse of children by father when it wasn't true during divorce proceedings. I the case I knew about, it may have been just to extract concessions and limit visitation. Sadly, I have to say that given the circumstances, I think we can reasonably up the probability of such accusations being false. But I don't know why I would need to estimate that probability at higher than the average rate for false accusations of crimes.

Originally Posted by TeapotCavalry View Post
I understand what you're saying. But, for one, how would that jibe with the presumption of innocence principle? He's innocent, yet probably guilty?
I'd want better evidence that I've seen to convict the man in a court of law. But for that, I require better than 90% certainty. A standard that once caused me to hang a jury. But given the underlying rates of such incest versus the underlying rates of such things being manufactured, even if inadvertantly, I do think the probability that Woody is lying is higher than the probability Dylan did not have the experience she wrote about.

Quote:
How about I start betting that every black person that is arrested is more likely to end up in prison compared to a white person. So the next black man that gets arrested - he's probably done the crime. But hey, that's just the winning horse.
I'm not following your logic here. The existance of racial disparities in our justice system does not imply that an arrested black person is more likely to be guilty than an arrested white person.

Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
But to do that we have to throw all the facts of the case in the bin apart from the fact that he has been accused. Where does that leave us? We believe all allogations of abuse regardless of witnesses to the contrary, physical evidence, plausibility of the story, etc.... How many cases will there be definitive evidence of innocence and what form could that definitive evidence take?
No, you don't have to. But I don't think there is convincing evidence either way.

Originally Posted by colander View Post
I haven't seen any evidence that that Allen was hated by any of the other witnesses to his behavior before they claimed to have witnessed his behavior. Are you telling me that you think it is more likely that multiple people conspired to concoct lies about Woody Allen because they hate him for some unspecified, unrelated reasons than that multiple people all saw him doing things that were improper? Because that is the only way your Bayesian argument can hold weight.
I think the Vanity Fair article indicates there was a lot of animosity in the household - as would be expected by the discovery Allen was *********** Mia's daughter.
__________________
Beth
"You are not the stuff of which you are made."
Richard Dawkins, July 2005, 10:45

http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_daw..._universe.html

Last edited by Beth; 6th February 2014 at 06:05 PM. Reason: Fix quotes
Beth 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 6th February 2014, 05:59 PM   #399
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,317
Originally Posted by Beth View Post
The statistics I've seen that I find credible lie around 5%. I'd find an estimated upper bound of 10% reasonable. I'll let you google for estimates of false crime reports. Let me know if find anything approaching as estimate of 50/50.
The studies I've seen aren't great. Getting professionals in the field to estimate how often there are false accusations was one. I did see mention of studies that came out with 50%, but I would be suspicous of them. Studies though will only cover the general case. Lets agree for the sake of argument that the general case is 7% false allocations, shall we? I don't see it as a critical point.

Originally Posted by Beth View Post
Absolutely. Unfortunately, there are many of them and they don't all point in the same direction.
I agree with you.

Originally Posted by Beth View Post
His creepy behavior towards Dylan as a young child was well documented if the Vanity Fair article is credible on that point.
If anybody really cared about convincing us with facts and giving us a chance to judge for ourselves we wouldn't be having to rely on the Vanity fair article.

Originally Posted by Beth View Post
Apparently there was a rule that Allen was not to be left alone with Dylan ever.
And yet she let him adopt her? I would say "supposedly" rather than "apparently".

Originally Posted by Beth View Post
Apparently, his behavior was concerning to others. Everything I read about this case is very consistent with an incidence of sexual assault.
Again, I would say "supposedly". If anybody cared about us being able to judge this on the evidence, we wouldn't be relying on the crappy Vanity Fair article for all these details. But they don't...

Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

Originally Posted by Beth View Post
Sadly, I have to say that given the circumstances, I think we can reasonably up the probability of such accusations being false. But I don't know why I would need to estimate that probability at higher than the average rate for false accusations of crimes.
I don't follow you. You don't feel the need to make an estimate, or you don't see why the probability under these circumstances would be greater than the average for false accusations?

Last edited by shuttlt; 6th February 2014 at 06:00 PM.
shuttlt 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 6th February 2014, 06:19 PM   #400
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 14,744
Originally Posted by TeapotCavalry View Post
According to Allen, in December 1991, Mia wrote a "glowing affidavit" that Allen was a "loving, caring and attentive father" when they were adopting Dylan. That was a month before Mia found out about the affair with Soon-Yi. Then the child molestation charges followed.
Sometimes it's a matter of connecting the dots. Maybe Farrow only made sense of Allen's unusual behavior toward Dylan after learning he molested Soon-Yi.
__________________
Cain: Don't be a homo.
Diablo: What's that supposed to mean?
Cain: It's a heteronormative remark meant to be taken at face-value.
Diablo: You're a lousy bigot. Apologise and withdraw that remark.
Cain: Nah.
Cain 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 » Social Issues & Current Events

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 08:51 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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.