Probability for existence of God
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-11-2017, 04:23 PM
RE: Probability for existence of God
(08-11-2017 04:03 PM)Henri Wrote:  I am certainly not measuring conscious creator of the universe. If I can measure such creator I could report some true, not assumed, characteristics of the creator. Here I am calculating probability of creator's existence.

No you are not. A creator that is NOT conscious is meaningless. It HAS to be, or the concept is worthless. Nothing exists in a vacuum, and your failure here, is to recognize that nothing exists in a vacuum.

(08-11-2017 03:00 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  You have not established that your two options are "encompassing". You assert it with no evidence, or rational support.

Quote:They are encompassing since we use one quality - consciousness.
And we know that consciousness can be higher of lower.

You JUST denied that you were calculating that. We know nothing of the sort, and you have provided no evidence of it. Yours seems to be much lower.

Quote:That scale encompasses all elements of reality. Meaning, every element of reality can be measured or tested for level of consciousness, even if we currently don't have much sophisticated tools for that.

LOLOL
Nope. Assertion with no evidence. You don't know what the VAST composition of reality is, much less if it can be tested, or how to do it. You don't even know at this point if there are other universes, or what their properties are. If the Quantum realm has other dimensions, then how do you know how they operate ? Dude,... maybe you could buy a clue.

Quote:But anyway, we can say, for example, that as far as we know rock has 0 level of consciousness. Or that rabbit has lower consciousness than human. And so on.

Irrelevant. You're talking about a being OUTSIDE this universe. You have nothing to measure from that environment. Nada. You have not defined "consciousness", and you can find NO scientific paper that says rabbits have ANY "consciousness". You just make up shit.

Quote:Literally every element of nature can be measured against a level of consciousness. Even atoms and subatomic particles.

LMAO. Lets see your data ?

Quote:So it's universal scale. And we use this universal scale to make one dividing point and present two options.

"We" don't. YOU do. Because you know next to nothing about science or math.

Quote:But bottom line is, whatever it is that created the universe that entity can be measured for consciousness, even if such measurement would produce 0 level.

Good. Do it. And while you're at it PROVE the universe "started".

Quote:Now, what we end up with is that based upon what we know there is base 50/50 chance that source of creation of the universe has high consciousness, with no possibility for us to calculate any lower chance.

We do not end up with that crap, and you have in NO WAY, justified your 50/50 and BTW, show us the WORK, you did to come to 50/50.

Quote:You realize anyone can say the exact same thing about Divine Pink Sparkly Unicorns.

Quote:OP doesn't calculate probability for specifications of God's characteristics,

Yet you go on and on about consciousness.

Quote:but probability for God's existence. What you present is within some of the subsets of two options presented in OP and cannot by applied to OP calculation.

You did no "calculations".

Quote:If we would to calculate probability for your claim, that God is Divine Pink Sparkly Unicorn out of all available options, that could be calculated to be almost 0% chance, because there are many many other options of the same validity.

Prove it.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2017, 04:25 PM
RE: Probability for existence of God
(08-11-2017 03:25 PM)brunumb Wrote:  Assumes facts not in evidence. You can't attempt calculations on the probability of a creator if you assume that the creator exists with certain attributes in the first place.

There is no assumption other than entity that created the universe, either first or second option, can be measured against a level of consciousness, even if only theoretically, including that result of such measurement could be 0.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2017, 04:31 PM
RE: Probability for existence of God
(08-11-2017 03:31 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  IF there is a possibility the coin is rigged, then your calculation is WORTHLESS unless you have data. You have none, so your calculation is worthless.

Again, probability method is the process of reasoning from incomplete information.

If I know that coin is rigged but I know nothing more about it, that's just part of what's called background information. That information by itself doesn't provide me with any additional insight how to calculate my probability.

So in line with probability principles, I still calculate probability based on information I know, which in that case is still 50/50. And again, if the game progresses and I am able to detect diversion from known distribution, I can then use that new information to correct my calculation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2017, 04:31 PM (This post was last modified: 08-11-2017 04:36 PM by Free.)
RE: Probability for existence of God
(08-11-2017 04:21 PM)Henri Wrote:  
(08-11-2017 03:19 PM)Free Wrote:  Dude ... there are absolutely no calculations whatsoever in your OP.
So what are you on about?

There is complete calculation, or method or logic if you will, needed for first base probability of 50/50 chance that conscious creator of the universe exists.

There are no calculations for second argument provided, only a general reference, but there are many such calculations that can be found.

I will show you what is obviously wrong with your OP. I will point to the very first thing:

Quote:(1) There are two encompassing options - that universe got to exist through unconscious means or through consciouns means, where conscious means include consciousness at or above human level. Human level is taken as delimiting point because humans are highest measurable beings with ability to plan and work with purpose toward complex and new end goal, so that's the best reference point available. Any other being, by what we can measure and observe, is absolutely not able to consciously plan and work with purpose to create a universe, so if an entity with consciousness less of a human's created the universe, that would practically be as if universe got to exist through literal unconscious means, because it would still be through chance.

There's a 3rd option:

The universe could be eternal and was never created. This is supported by actual observation.

We currently can find no dimensions to the universe. No length, width, height, or depth.

Your assumptions about a created universe when you have no evidence to support creation are outstripped by the position that the universe could be eternal because we do indeed have observable evidence to support it.

In addition to that, we can offer reasoning and logic. For example:

1. Science has long ago determined that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, yet there it is ... existing. The only way it could have its existence without being created is to have an eternal nature.

2. If we accept the eternal nature of energy, then that which is eternal could not have a point of origin, since it was never created. Therefore, if all energy in the universe is eternal, then it is by necessity that the universe itself would need to be eternal in order to support eternal energy.

3. We can prove that infinity exists conceptually. If the universe is eternal, with no dimensions, then it would also be infinite. To prove the existence of infinity, all you need to do is start counting numbers and let us know when you reach the last number that can be counted. It's as easy as 1 ... 2 ... 3 ...

So there you have it. You have the existence of the universe with no known dimensions, and you have solid reasoning and logic to support its existence as being eternal.

So with this evidence verses your lack of evidence, why should we accept your premise that the universe must have been created?

Again, your premise is false.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Free's post
08-11-2017, 04:32 PM
RE: Probability for existence of God
(08-11-2017 04:25 PM)Henri Wrote:  
(08-11-2017 03:25 PM)brunumb Wrote:  Assumes facts not in evidence. You can't attempt calculations on the probability of a creator if you assume that the creator exists with certain attributes in the first place.

There is no assumption other than entity that created the universe, either first or second option, can be measured against a level of consciousness, even if only theoretically, including that result of such measurement could be 0.

It doesn't matter YOU used a word you never coherently defined.
You have no way to measure anything in the OP. You made up everything. You did no calculations. You asserted facts not in evidence. As I said, you would fail Probability and Stats. You do not EVEN BEGIN to understand the problems.
The OP is meaningless and totally worthless. Hope you're not paying tuition somewhere for this crap.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2017, 04:33 PM
RE: Probability for existence of God
(08-11-2017 04:25 PM)Henri Wrote:  There is no assumption other than entity that created the universe, either first or second option, can be measured against a level of consciousness, even if only theoretically, including that result of such measurement could be 0.

Until evidence of such a creator is presented, no assumptions or calculations need be made. It is meaningless conjecture.

And I repeat: You cannot assign a probability to the existence of something you cannot comprehend.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2017, 04:34 PM
RE: Probability for existence of God
(08-11-2017 03:35 PM)brunumb Wrote:  Your application of probability methods is nothing more than guesswork. That is not how probabilities are calculated. You DO need information and it must be directly related to the investigation under consideration. You can use classical probability calculations when you know all the possible outcomes and all the favourable outcomes, as in the rolling of dice. Or you can use long run proportion when you have a previous history of events and use them to make a prediction. If it has snowed on Christmas day in 20 of the last 100 years you could estimate the probability that it will snow on Christmas day this year as 20%.

Your estimates have no validity and are just figures plucked from...... the air.

Not really. It would be so if, for example, premise (1) is incomplete. But it is not incomplete, it is all encompassing, no third option can be added to it, and both options are symmetric with respect to outcome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2017, 04:35 PM
RE: Probability for existence of God
(08-11-2017 04:15 PM)Henri Wrote:  
(08-11-2017 03:13 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  You're also forgetting to consider that the universe, i.e., everything that exists, has always existed in some form and it did not have a beginning in the first place.

That's an assumption, not a provable fact.

But it doesn't even matter. Calculation can be corrected for variant that universe always existed and resulting probability would still be the same. I have written something about it in some other post here.
No it's not an assumption. I'm pointing out that you are ignoring a possibility. It's you that is assuming that the universe "got to exist" but why suppose it hasn't always existed? It seems to me that the unprovable notion is that at one time the universe didn't exist. How would one look for evidence of non-existence. If we already know that existence exists, why not begin there as our starting point instead of starting with nothing?

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes true scotsman's post
08-11-2017, 04:39 PM
RE: Probability for existence of God
(08-11-2017 04:25 PM)Henri Wrote:  There is no assumption other than entity that created the universe, either first or second option, can be measured against a level of consciousness, even if only theoretically, including that result of such measurement could be 0.

Demonstrate that your assumption is completely valid.

The existence of two options, creator and no creator, does not mean that they are equally probable regardless of the absence of any other information. You are trying to establish a probability for the universe having a creator but you start with an assumed probability that is invalid. All subsequent calculations are rendered invalid as a consequence.

No gods necessary.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2017, 04:41 PM
RE: Probability for existence of God
(08-11-2017 04:31 PM)Henri Wrote:  
(08-11-2017 03:31 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  IF there is a possibility the coin is rigged, then your calculation is WORTHLESS unless you have data. You have none, so your calculation is worthless.

Again, probability method is the process of reasoning from incomplete information.

If I know that coin is rigged but I know nothing more about it, that's just part of what's called background information. That information by itself doesn't provide me with any additional insight how to calculate my probability.

So in line with probability principles, I still calculate probability based on information I know, which in that case is still 50/50. And again, if the game progresses and I am able to detect diversion from known distribution, I can then use that new information to correct my calculation.

LOL
As I said, you know nothing about Probability and Stats. IF you KNOW the coin is rigged, then you KNOW the probability CANNOT be 50/50 ... and a FIRST GRADER could see that. You don't know what it IS, but you KNOW it cannot be 50/50. You are a total moron. You KNOW the coin is rigged, and you KNOW it CANNOT be 50/50. Facepalm

All this is irrelevant. You did no "calculations". You have no data. You made up everything in the OP, and it's all meaningless and totally worthless. You don't get what Probability is all about.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: