Philosophy Now Forum

Some use it as evidence for God which as non sequiturs go is just ridiculous
Because statistical improbability has got absolutely nothing to do with God

surreptitious57 wrote:Some use it as evidence for God

That's odd. Richard Dawkins believes in it (while admitting it's "less satisfactory"), and thinks it's an argument for why there doesn't need to be a god. So he sees it the opposite from the way you suggest.

statistical improbability has got absolutely nothing to do with God

Actually, it has a great deal to do with those sorts of arguments. If something is highly implausible it normally leads us to expect a more rational explanation than chance. For example, if we go to shoot dice and I roll 200 number 6's in a row, you have two comments you can make: 1) "Wow, what are the odds of that?" and 2) "These dice are probably loaded to roll 6's!"

Now, which is the more plausible explanation? For which one would you most normally opt? Would you suppose all that was a work was "chance," or that some person had manipulated the outcome?

If you don't have an opinion, how would you like to go to a casino with me?

A statistical improbability is not implausible merely less likely than other probabilities
It can be entirely explained by mathematics so invoking God is therefore not required

Immanuel Can wrote:
If some thing is highly implausible it normally leads us to expect a more rational explanation than chance. For example if we go to shoot dice and I roll 200 number 6s in a row you have two comments you can make: 1) Wow what are the odds of that? 2) These dice are probably loaded to roll 6s!

Now which is the more plausible explanation? For which one would you most normally opt? Would
you suppose all that was a work was chance or that some person had manipulated the outcome?

Argument from incredulity cannot deny statistical improbability
200 6s is entirely possible and is not the least bit implausible
It actually happens to be as likely as any other probability

surreptitious57 wrote:A statistical improbability is not implausible merely less likely than other probabilities

That is true. But since all empirical knowledge is always probabilistic, to admit that doesn't actually tell us much. What tells us much more is how GREAT the improbability is: something highly improbable relative to normal explanation conduces to a different explanation, just as the 6's being rolled conduces to the "loaded dice" hypothesis much more than the "Gee, what an odd chance" hypothesis.

It can be entirely explained by mathematics so invoking God is therefore not required

This isn't true. Maths does not "explain" the origin of anything, just as maths cannot "cause" anything. Maths can tell you that $10 will buy you 4 cups of tea for $2 each, and leave a predictable amount over -- but maths cannot put one leaf of tea in your pantry. Likewise, maths can tell you that you have $10 in pocket, because that's how much you had in your pocket when you left the house: but it cannot explain why you have $10 in the first place -- whether by a gift, by earning it or by stealing it.

Maths have no "explaining" power at all when it comes to causes and their effects. Maths neither make things happen nor explain why they do.

Now, where maths can help us is with probability estimations. For instance, mathematics can tell us how great the statistical improbability is, and thus what the most plausible explanation of the ones offered is: however, they cannot tell us which definition is correct. And that's precisely the point: an extreme statistical improbability argues against chance as an explanation, and mathematics are what shows us that.

Argument from incredulity cannot deny statistical improbability
200 6s is entirely possible and is not the least bit implausible
It actually happens to be as likely as any other probability

Not so. 200-6's is highly implausible. If you think I'm wrong, try it out. You'll soon see.

Can it happen? Well, theoretically, yes: but are we wise to think it will happen without human meddling?

Again, if you don't know the answer to this, I'm itching to go to the casino with you.

Now what is the REAL statistical improbability of the universe existing by pure chance? It's conservatively estimated that just the one variable of the gravitational constant is unlikely to have happened by chance at 1:10 to the 60th power (or with sixty zeros after it). The mass-energy distribution of the early universe is estimated to be improbable in the order of 1:10th power to the 123rd power. Just try writing or typing that number out, and I'll wait while you do it...

As you can see, our trip to the casino is vastly unlikely to prove lucrative for you. And, in fact, it's so likely as to benefit me that I'm ready to go right now...

I'll bring the dice.

Typicl moronic upside-down kristard 'logic'. What is the chance of any one of us being born, out of the millions of sperm? What is the chance of picking out one grain of sand on a beach? What is the chance of picking one particular parking space out of an empty carpark?...

you surely know that you are repeating the sentiment of Milton's Satan in "Paradise Lost."

Yes, I do. Truly, it 'is' better to rule in Hell than serve in Heaven.

#

we are not the "master of our fates"...we are going to "serve" something...we are not our own...there's no reality to the idea of individual self-sufficiency

Sez you.

Me, I'll stick with my "brave madness".

Immanuel Can wrote: Again, if you don't know the answer to this, I'm itching to go to the casino with you.

As you can see, our trip to the casino is vastly unlikely to prove lucrative for you. And, in fact, it's so likely as to benefit me that I'm ready to go right now...

I'll bring the dice.

I believe that a Casino will provide the dice. I seriously doubt that any Casino would allow you to bring in dice, or to use the dice that you brought in.

Immanuel Can wrote:
200 6s is highly implausible

This is completely false and demonstrates a classic error in reasoning with regard to these types of questions

The probability of throwing a dice 200 times and getting 6 every single time is equal to all other probabilities

Any machine calculating this would not find this remarkable at all as they can only process information logically

You however do find it remarkable because you are human and so therefore can process information emotionally

But the probability of 6 coming up 200 times is only remarkable to you because you think it has some significance

It is however entirely arbitrary as some other humans like me for example think it is of precisely zero significance

Were you to think like a machine as I do you too would see that you have no reason to apply any significance either

surreptitious57 wrote:

Immanuel Can wrote:
200 6s is highly implausible

This is completely false and demonstrates a classic error in reasoning with regard to these types of questions.

IC is correct, s57 is wrong.

thedoc wrote: I believe that a Casino will provide the dice. I seriously doubt that any Casino would allow you to bring in dice, or to use the dice that you brought in.

Yeah, but if I sneak some in, surreptitious won't complain. He thinks it's all chance anyway, and every chance is an equal chance, apparently. So what motive would he have to tell on me if I did?

surreptitious57 wrote:

Immanuel Can wrote:
200 6s is highly implausible

This is completely false and demonstrates a classic error in reasoning with regard to these types of questions ...

Please, please, please...can we go to the casino NOW?

I can really use the cash.

thedoc wrote:

surreptitious57 wrote:

Immanuel Can wrote:
200 6s is highly implausible

This is completely false and demonstrates a classic error in reasoning with regard to these types of questions.

IC is correct, s57 is wrong.

Could you explain why?

henry quirk wrote:you surely know that you are repeating the sentiment of Milton's Satan in "Paradise Lost."

Yes, I do. Truly, it 'is' better to rule in Hell than serve in Heaven.

But Henry...it's HELL!

Well, I'll wish better for you, even if you don't.

we are not the "master of our fates"...we are going to "serve" something...we are not our own...there's no reality to the idea of individual self-sufficiency

Sez you.

No. I don't have to "sez" it. Reality will "sez" it for me. (Can I has a cheeseburger now?)

Seriously, we all die, Henry. Every last one of us. The mortality rate on this globe is 100%. Not only that, but we can't set the time of that, the circumstances, or how long we have. And until then, we cannot decide what will or will not happen to us, or how long we'll even remain capable of freedom or good health.

Me, I'll stick with my "brave madness".

Sinatra sang, "I did it my way," and yet he's dead now, and that means he's not doing it his way at all. Whatever he thought he achieved, it's all in the past now -- at least for him. So really, what's his boast worth? Not a darn thing.