Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 12:46:46 -0800, Darren New wrote:
> 
>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> Not so much that they're too unlikely, but that they are vague enough
>>> as to take anything that fits the criteria and say "well, it happened,
>>> so therefore it wasn't improbable enough".  See the difference?
>> That's what science is for. And statistics. Generally speaking, it's
>> *possible* quantum particles could randomly come into existence in the
>> shape of a living, breathing Jesus. Unlikely enough I'd attribute it to
>> something else, tho.
> 
> Exactly; because your belief is that such a thing is unlikely, so there 
> must be a rational (within your frame of reference) explanation for it 
> that you're just not seeing.

I don't think you're reading what I'm writing. Isn't it *your* belief 
that Jesus will be reincarnated by random fluctuations of the quantum 
foam is rather unlikely?

Were it to happen, I'd think it more likely God made it happen than that 
it was just random.

> So if something were to occur that you couldn't put a scientific 
> explanation to, you'd accept that your view was wrong that there isn't a 
> god?  I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here...

That's basically what I'm saying, yes. And it's not just "we don't know 
how it happened", but "we know it can't possibly happen".

> For you or me, sure.  But you and I don't have the monopoly on 
> perspectives that make sense to people, either.  Maybe God told them that 
> the perception was right; 

I have no problem with that. Just because it's irrational doesn't mean 
it's *bad*.

> Well, true enough - because the event already happened.  But the 
> statistical likelihood of it happening prior to actually happening is 
> what I was referring to.

The statistical likelihood of me rolling 3 6 4 5 1 3 4 2 3 on a die is 
identical to me rolling 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 on a die. You can't look at 
the thing after the fact and say "it was unlikely", because you're 
ignoring all the *other* unlikely things that didn't happen. No volcano 
opened up in San Francisco, nor did the Las Vegas strip flood. But you'd 
be laughed at if you tried to use those non-events to prove the 
non-existence of God.

> Exactly.  Which is why an event or series of events that have happened 
> (as opposed to "if they do happen") is unlikely to prove that God exists 
> to anyone - because if they do happen, then they were statistically 
> likely to happen and all the information necessary to make that 
> determination just wasn't in yet.

Unless someone predicts it *specifically* in advance.

>>> Agreed, because belief isn't logical.  Otherwise, it wouldn't be
>>> belief, it'd be fact-based.
>> Well, it isn't (in my experience) logical, but it's also not scientific.
>> The two are somewhat different.
> 
> Somewhat different, but strongly related.

Well, the logic rules we use are scientifically supported, and science 
seems to continue to obey the laws of logic.

If modus ponens didn't work, we wouldn't use it. Since begging the 
question doesn't work, we don't use it.

>> If you like that sort of stuff, read some Greg Egan works. I'd recommend
>> Permutation City for a start, or his Axiomatic short-story collection.
> 
> I'll add that to my list as well.  :-)

"Permutation City" explores the nature of reality and its relationship 
to self. "Quarantine" explores free will. "Disporia" defines 
self-awareness/conciousness in the first dozen pages or so, but I'd have 
to read it again to appreciate it more - read the first chapter or two 
in the bookstore if you like. "Axiomatic" is a collection of short 
stories exploring, well, axiomaticity, if there is such a word. 
"Distress" is about the relationship of love and knowledge and reality, 
sorta.

I see he has more stuff out that I'll have to buy. Cool.

(I found Teranesia very disappointing, and Schild's Ladder interesting 
but not amazing, fwiw.)

> LOL, now *that* made me laugh out loud.

Yeah, when you've studied and thought about these subjects for a couple 
decades, it's not hard to laugh out loud at the stuff people regurgitate 
because they've been told it by their spiritual leaders.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     It's not feature creep if you put it
     at the end and adjust the release date.

Post a reply to this message