
May 25th, 2004, 08:05 PM
|
 |
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 8,806
Thanks: 54
Thanked 33 Times in 31 Posts
|
|
Re: OT: An Existential Dilemma
Quote:
Originally posted by Zapmeister:
quote: Originally posted by PvK:
While it is true that we could all be Norfleet, it is perhaps more likely that... It's possible. Just not very likely.
|
Hmmm. Someone with more education in this area may care to correct me, but I believe that the above statement is untrue for a rather esoteric reason.
That reason is that the words "likely" and "possible" imply a probabalistic treatment of an existential question, which is invalid.
It is meaningless, for example, to conclude that there is a 60% chance that there is a god. Either there is a god or there isn't - there's no 60% about it.
The same applies to questions of historical fact. You can't say that its likely that the Great Flood occurred, because it has already either happened or not. What you can describe is your uncertainty in the matter, which is different (being a statement about your knowledge rather than about the alleged event).
... Yes, the first was a statement of uncertainty, and the second a statement of odds. It's still useful to think of hypotheses as having a "chance" of being correct, based on what knowledge you have and how sure you are about each element of a hypothesis.
You can also apply the same logic and language to uncertainty about past events about which you have imperfect evidence.
Conversely, you can take probability and express it as uncertainty that something will happen. So, if you insist I say that we all not being Norfleet is something our victim can be very certain is not true, then I can compare that degree of certainty to the extreme certainty that I will lose the Dom II challenge I described.
PvK
[ May 25, 2004, 19:21: Message edited by: PvK ]
|