Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Topics > Science, Math, and Philosophy
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-24-2007, 06:04 PM
Lestat Lestat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,304
Default Shouldn\'t We Leave Math Out Of It?

In order to assign a probability, don't you need to have a non-zero reference point? In other words, we can assign a probability to whether or not it will rain tomorrow, because we have historic non-zero values to go by. We can even assign a probability for death by an eagle dropping a tortoise on your head (it has happened at least once in human history).

But when it comes to religions and gods, I can see no basis for assigning statistical likelihoods. And the mere attempt to do so, only lends weight to a believer's postion. In other words, it gives him a platform he doesn't deserve.

Would we dare attempt to assign a probability for the existence of a Unicorn or it's attributes? Is it not pure folly? For to try and do so, should be seen as an utter triumphant victory for any Unicornist.

Math only becomes viable when we concede likelihood. i.e. if we concede the potential for 100 different gods and/or religions, we can now use probability to assess likelihood for one of them being correct over others. But just because something is "possible" does not mean it deserves statistical consideration. Even if the word "possible" must necessarily contain a meaning of non-zero value, it is still possible for that value to be so infintessimally small as to be unworthy of any mathematical application or discussion.

This is why in the most recent debate between David and PairTheBoard, I have to give at least that one round to PBT. I thought he made a very strong case that alot of the math, statistics, and probabilities, that David uses to stress his points, are not necessarily applicable to things like gods and religion. In other words, David might be taking certain liberties with select math and statistical terms in order to add an authoritative quality to his posts. I don't accuse him of purposely doing this, but for PBT to even be able to point this out is demonstrative, since David obviously deserves our utmost respect when it comes to math.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-24-2007, 06:26 PM
David Sklansky David Sklansky is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 5,092
Default Re: Shouldn\'t We Leave Math Out Of It?

I never tried to seriously assign a probability to God existing. I tried to assign a probability to whether or not paranormal events actually ever happenned.

What you may be trying to point out is that when the experimental frequency of an event is zero, the probability of it occurring can not be calculated as easily as if it had at least one ocurrence. But an upper bound can be deduced. In other words if the first 30 alien abduction stories were debunked, I could lay at least 10-1 against the truth of the next one (assumming only this information.)
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-24-2007, 06:40 PM
Lestat Lestat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,304
Default Re: Shouldn\'t We Leave Math Out Of It?

<font color="blue"> I tried to assign a probability to whether or not paranormal events actually ever happenned. </font>

I believe you have also tried to assign probabilities to God's attributes as well (such as if He cares about belief in the divinity of Jesus, etc.).

My question is, how can this (or calculating for paranormal events), be done with a straight face?

I'm not trying to be rude or a smart-alec, but if I imagine that I have a fairy godmother, how do you assign a probability for her skirt having a 3 inch hem as opposed to having a .5 inch hem? Or the probability that I died once and she brought me back to life?

My main point is, that the very attempt to do so (assign a probability), gives credence to the fact that I actually have a fairy godmother in the first place. Theists definitely have the better PR campaign going here. They have us earnestly considering the probabilities on properties for an event, before any basis for the actual event has been found. I really think that's a trap that many agnostics (myself included), fall into.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-24-2007, 06:49 PM
David Sklansky David Sklansky is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 5,092
Default Re: Shouldn\'t We Leave Math Out Of It?

You misinterpreted off the cuff remarks. Its only miracles, and the debunking of them that math can really examine.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-24-2007, 07:07 PM
chezlaw chezlaw is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: corridor of uncertainty
Posts: 6,642
Default Re: Shouldn\'t We Leave Math Out Of It?

[ QUOTE ]
You misinterpreted off the cuff remarks. Its only miracles, and the debunking of them that math can really examine.

[/ QUOTE ]
hallelullah, praise the lord.

chez
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-24-2007, 09:20 PM
kerowo kerowo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 6,880
Default Re: Shouldn\'t We Leave Math Out Of It?

Doesn't theorectical physics predict things that the experimental physicists have yet to see in the lab? That may not be quite the same thing, but I don't think you would predict something that had a zero percent chance of happening.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-24-2007, 09:27 PM
LooseCaller LooseCaller is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: OBP < .300
Posts: 562
Default Re: Shouldn\'t We Leave Math Out Of It?

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't theorectical physics predict things that the experimental physicists have yet to see in the lab? That may not be quite the same thing, but I don't think you would predict something that had a zero percent chance of happening.

[/ QUOTE ]

but they already have prior evidence that the calculations they make (and the models they use to determine things) have led to the truth before, so there's already some empirical evidence in their favor.

the god question doesnt have the "we were right before" argument
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-24-2007, 09:34 PM
kerowo kerowo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 6,880
Default Re: Shouldn\'t We Leave Math Out Of It?

You should look at how outrageous some of the things predicted by physicists before they were seen experimentally were.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-24-2007, 10:07 PM
m_the0ry m_the0ry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 790
Default Re: Shouldn\'t We Leave Math Out Of It?

Kerowo has a good point. It isn't exactly logical to infer that because electrons can tunnel a baseball can tunnel through walls. Yet modern physics says that without a doubt a baseball can tunnel through a concrete wall. You could try and see this experimentally by throwing a baseball at a wall once every .5 seconds until the end of the universe and you would never observe it, and yet it is still possible.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, omniscient deities and math are incompatible theories and so math has no place in a disproof of god. I use disproof in the loosest imaginable way because god is such a vapor-concept that it could never possibly be disproven.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 -4. The time now is 07:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.