Scott Mayers wrote:Obvious Leo wrote:I'm not a bully at all Scott. I simply won't stand idly by and allow somebody to peddle falsehoods without drawing attention to the fact. The members of this forum have a right to know that what you are proclaiming as true is UNIVERSALLY acknowledged as bollocks.
Your acting as a 'bully' by simply declaring your opinion without justification and presenting others' as being simply retarded by comparison. In contrast, I believe in granting people a charity to be reasonable by default even where others may not understand this at first. I believe that to contribute effectively, we have to assume by default that people have GOOD reasons to behave the way they do with respect to their experience in this life. This means sincerely trying to "place yourself in other people's shoes" which mean that in order to understand them requires finding a justification that actually leads to confirming them as being reasonable from their perspective. You are only acting to insult others by degrading them without sincerely trying to understand them from
their perspective.
I'm getting tired of trying if only because some people simply default to assuming one is insane for their thinking as well as their being. And it defeats one's ability to prove themselves one way or the other no matter what they could do. It's killing me because I can only either keep trying to be understood or just give up permanently trying to appeal to what others will think of me by default of some genetic factors.
I don't know if I have any hope, but my only chance is to try to convince others' to appeal to the invested effort by at least
trying to be fair. But I'm losing the last thread of hope here. If this world benefits best by assuring those who threaten others through insult should be dismissed, what is contingently based on one's emotions alone are ALL that matters and is then what makes me question participating in a game that will never favor me no matter what I might say or do. I'm getting too tired now. And I beg every time I fall asleep that I could just return to the very nothingness I came from. In the word of the band, Poison, "Give me something to believe in,"becaue I'm losing faith in ANY humam being at all....which includes.....
...myself!
Ok, i give you the last hope i have that we could understand each others, and see who is wrong (this could include both of us, or neither of us).
But, our way to argue here, have be a fail, the first step is to change it.
I propose to you, a new general strategy, we will go step my step, we will define and formalize everything that we use, including reasoning rules.
We will also formalize the game, first to see if we speak to the same game, second because we can’t apply our formalized reasoning rules at it otherwise.
If something is to hard to formalize, we could agree to have a pseudo-formalization on it.
After each step/definition, we will wait for the other one to accept this step, or refuse it.
Do you agree ?
Here is my first step, i will define what mean "the probability to have X by doing Y is c", also called "P(X)=c in Y".
Consider an experiment Y, we will call the result of this experiment R(Y).
P(X)=c in Y mean that:
For whatever real number E>0, and whatever whole number S>0, i could repeatably do the experiment (but do it at least S times), and increment C each time i get R(Y)=X, such as, if i did the experiment N time, then i get |C/N-c|<E.
To give you a example, consider the experiment Y: "tossing a coin", and one of its possible result X : "getting a head".
P("getting a head")=1/2 in "tossing a coin" , mean that:
If you give me whatever E>0, by example 10^(-100), and whatever number S, by example 10000.
Then i could repeatably toss the coin(but a minimum of 10000 times), and if N is the number of time i tossed the coin, and C the number of time i get a head by doing it, then after a moment, i will get |C/N-1/2|<10^(-100).
Note that this is only a example with E=10^(-100) and S=10000, for saying that P("getting a head")=1/2, it should be true for every E>0 you could give me, and every S>0 you could give me.
Also note that P(X) will not depend of your luck at all here, you could get a head 10000 times in a row, you could still continue and attain a number C of head such as |C/N - 1/2| is as small as you want.
And note that if you can’t, by example if you
always get a head by tossing your coin, it mean that P(head) when you toss your coin, is not really 1/2, but 1.
Yes my definition could seem complex, but take into account that i couldn’t use some form of circularity, like in "the probability is the likeliness…", or "the probability is the chance to…".
I had to found the substance of what we mean by "probability", and the reality is that it is a complex concept.
Do you agree, and if not, how would you formalize what a "probability" mean ?
