16 Apr 07
Originally posted by rwingettI disagree. If no information is available and there are two possible outcomes then the odds are 50/50. But as no information is available these odds are pretty meaningless.
This is absolutely and utterly false. If absolutely no information is available about the two possible outcomes then the odds are absolutely unknowable. You cannot randomly assign a 50/50 probability. Perhaps you should re-read the previous thread in question since its finer points have obviously escaped you.
16 Apr 07
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadIf no information is available then the odds could be anything and are unknowable.
I disagree. If [b]no information is available and there are two possible outcomes then the odds are 50/50. But as no information is available these odds are pretty meaningless.[/b]
EDIT: The last thread we had was basically page after page of making fun of the idiot who came up with the 50/50 God statement. And now you are parroting it.
16 Apr 07
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadI suggest you go back to the "probability" thread, created on Nov. 18, 2006, by EcstremeVenom. Re-read the whole thing. There you will see how wrong you are.
I disagree. If [b]no information is available and there are two possible outcomes then the odds are 50/50. But as no information is available these odds are pretty meaningless.[/b]
16 Apr 07
Originally posted by PenguinMy "50/50" post was meant tongue in cheek. It's what I tell my opponents at the poker table when they ask me about the odds in different situations.
This sounds amazing. You're a gambler by trade, presumably a reasonably successful one to earn a living through it. As such, you must understand probability and chance. If this were a horse race, would you really say that every horse has a fifty/fifty chance of winning? After all, each horse either will win or won't win.
It's not Your God or No God, it's ...[text shortened]... man Catholic God and spares those who drink Guiness on a Saturday afternoon.
--- Penguin.
I'm well aware of odds and probability when it comes to a deck of cards and know how to use it to my advantage. No brag, just fact. I'm one of maybe 2-3% of poker players who make a living at it.
When it comes to God, I know .. that I don't know. I guessing God exists, i'm not asserting He does.
Math is good thing when figuring odds/probability in a poker game. Even more important is knowing your opponents tendencies and reading his "tells" or body language/mood at the present moment in time. Anyone can win the big hand when they're dealt the winner, it's winning all those little pots inbetween that makes the difference in your bottom line. It's "stealing" a pot when holding a busted flush in your hand because you can read weakness in your opponent and you're able to "pull the trigger" on a big bet. It requires "heart" and intuition .. knowing the odds don't hurt either.
16 Apr 07
Originally posted by whodeyOK, I guess I misunderstood your statement. I still think that the existence of life isn't evidence for God. I say that because it is an open statement that could fit any theory, like abiogenesis.
You are correct in that just because people believe something does not make it true as you point out. However, it is an indication that it may be true and thus evidence nontheless. You must ask yourself why people believe certain things and then weigh the evidences as to why they believe what they believe.
Your second statement sounds jumbled. First you ...[text shortened]... ophy instructor. Granted, his response may reflect itself on your grade so be wary in doing so.
I'm not sure what context Jesus was saying that, but that's not what I'm getting out anyway. The point is that you believe God exists, and that Jesus is the son of God, without evidence. The only refrence you have is the bible, but that's not much for evidence, unless you want to believe every religion's "bible".
I have not thought about this seriously, but I think the scientific method is the only way to uncover truth. It uses our senses to percieve the world around us, and our mind to rationalize. This is all we got, so any other way wouldn't make sense.
17 Apr 07
Originally posted by XanthosNZI think this comes down to a point of view. From the point of view of an ignorant observer, if we have no information on which to base a decision upon which of two choices is "right", then from our point of view, the likelihood of either being right is 50/50. However, that doesn't mean that the odds really are 50/50.
If no information is available then the odds could be anything and are unknowable.
EDIT: The last thread we had was basically page after page of making fun of the idiot who came up with the 50/50 God statement. And now you are parroting it.
17 Apr 07
5 edits
Originally posted by scottishinnzYou and twhitehead are correct. RWillis and the other Kiwi remain confused about the material in the cited thread and the issue at hand. Probability is nothing more than a measure of information. I have a favorite example demonstrating this that I can provide if people remain unconvinced by even my expert testimony.
If we have no information on which to base a decision upon which of two choices is "right", then from our point of view, the likelihood of either being right is 50/50. However, that doesn't mean that the odds really are 50/50.
An absence of information distinguishing states is measured by all states being equally likely, just as a balance balances whether it is balancing two equal masses or no masses at all. Thus, if there truly is no information, as you say, an affirmer and a denier have equal chances of being correct; or as I prefer to frame it, I would accept any wager against an equally uninformed person on such a matter offering me at least even odds.
17 Apr 07
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesIf probability is merely a measure of information, then how can probability apply in a circumstance
Probability is nothing more than a measure of information.
in which there is no information?
That's like asking if a blooglum weighs more or less than a flaglorp. There is no information about
either a blooglum or a flagorp, so any answer one might provide is pure speculation. Speculation
(guesswork) seems to be the opposite of probability (prediction).
To say 'I know nothing, therefore the probability is 50/50' is a contradiction in terms, because
probability indicates knowledge of something. Unless one includes the concept that there are
two choices as information.
Nemesio
17 Apr 07
11 edits
Originally posted by NemesioIn the same way that a balance, which is merely a measure of mass, can have a reading in the absence of any mass.
If probability is merely a measure of information, then how can probability apply in a circumstance
in which there is no information?
Just as mass perturbs a balance, and a larger one will tip a balance against a smaller one, information perturbs probability readings, with indicative information outweighing dispositive information, or vice versa.
A shuffled deck of cards is the simplest example. Shuffling is simply the mechanical means of eliminating all information about the state of the deck. After a shuffle, you have no information about what the bottom card is; you know only that it can be in one of 52 states. (Such knowledge does not constitute information; it follows deductively from the definition of a deck of cards. Definitions do not constitute information, and deduction can never yield additional information.)
Now, suppose from that shuffled deck, you peek at the top card and it is an Ace. That is information; you now know that the bottom card is less than 4/52 likely to be an Ace; whereas before, when you had no information, it was equally likely to be an Ace as any other particular rank. After the peek, the probability is 3/51.
What accounts for the change from 4/52 to 3/51? Reality didn't change; only your information about reality did. Thus, probability must be a measure of information.
Information is that which allows you to distinguish among states. Seeing the Ace on top allows you to distinguish this deck from all decks that have no Ace on top. And among all decks with an Ace on top, exactly 3/51 of them have an Ace on bottom. The balance tips in favor of having no Ace on the bottom of this deck. (Likewise, if you saw no Ace on the peek, the balance would tip in favor of this deck having an Ace on bottom, as among all decks with no Ace on top, exactly 4/51 of them have and Ace on the bottom. And similarly, without any information distinguishing this deck from any other, exactly 4/52 of all decks have an Ace on the bottom. The differences among these numbers reflect only the extent to which we can distinguish the current deck from all decks; which is to say, they reflect only our information.)
17 Apr 07
6 edits
Originally posted by NemesioInformation is a distinct notion from knowledge. Twhitehead's scenario and my analysis dealt with information.
That's like asking if a blooglum weighs more or less than a flaglorp. There is no information about
either a blooglum or a flagorp, so any answer one might provide is pure speculation. Speculation
(guesswork) seems to be the opposite of probability (prediction).
To say 'I know nothing, therefore the probability is 50/50' is a contradiction in te ...[text shortened]... [/i]. Unless one includes the concept that there are
two choices as information.
Nemesio
In twhitehead's scenario, it was stipulated that we had no information, which is to say, nothing to indicate that the claim is more likely true or false. I presumed that the terms of the claim in question were well-defined; that is, if "all were revealed" it would be straightforward and objective to decide whether God exists.
I agree that the claim "I know nothing AND I know that the probability of any particular state in an n-state system being realized is 1/n" is a contradiction, but it's not one that I'm making.
Rather, I am claiming that "I have no information distinguishing among the states of this n-state system AND I know that such lack of information means that the probability of any state in this system being realized is 1/n" is true.
17 Apr 07
Originally posted by rwingettI am not wrong. It is possible that you don't understand what I am saying though.
I suggest you go back to the "probability" thread, created on Nov. 18, 2006, by EcstremeVenom. Re-read the whole thing. There you will see how wrong you are.
My claim is that given a situation with two possible outcomes and no further information about the situation then the probability of one outcome taking place is .5
I am a mathematician and I know that the above statement is true. If you don't believe me I can go into more detail.
This does not apply to the Go Exists/God does not exist scenario because there is a significant amount of information contained in the statement which makes the 50/50 no-longer applicable.
Also, probability theory does not dictate actual outcomes so even if the probability of something occurring is 0.000000001 then it may still occur.
17 Apr 07
1 edit
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesYour card example is flawed. Not all decks of cards have 52 cards and not all have the same type of cards. Therefore, you must be given this information, which does not follow "deductively from the definition of a deck of cards".
In the same way that a balance, which is merely a measure of mass, can have a reading in the absence of any mass.
Just as mass perturbs a balance, and a larger one will tip a balance against a smaller one, information perturbs probability readings, with indicative information outweighing dispositive information, or vice versa.
A shuffled deck o stinguish the current deck from all decks; which is to say, they reflect only our information.)
EDIT: What would be the probability of picking a 7 from this deck of cards? http://www.unclesgames.com/product_info.php/products_id/1744