Probability
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 3 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-03-2013, 02:05 PM
RE: Probability
(09-03-2013 01:52 PM)Phaedrus Wrote:  You admitted to Vosur not 6 hours ago that this argument is flawed, mainly because you copied it off the blackboard without understanding it... That was less than twelve hours ago. Why are you posting it now when you know you're incorrect?

I admitted to Vosur that a poor choice of words on my part caused people to misunderstand the point I was trying to make....not that this argument is flawed. For instance you wrote a whole page about how it is impossible to calculate the probability of drawing a marble colored X without knowing the compostion of the bin.....which has nothing to do with the point I am making. I am not trying to calculate a probability. I am trying to show that the follow statement is true:

The more white marbles observed without ever observing a non-white increases the chances that all marbles are white.

If the proof provided that the above statement is true is incorrect, then show it to be incorrect.

Vosur, Anjele, Hanoff.....have you learned nothing in my absence?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2013, 02:22 PM
RE: Probability
You also did not correctly read my post, as it was primarily about the impossibility of determining the nature of the set (that is, what the probability of all the marbles being white) based on the information given. Read it again.

E 2 = (mc 2)2 + (pc )2
614C → 714N + e + ̅νe
2 K(s) + 2 H2O(l) → 2 KOH(aq) + H2 (g) + 196 kJ/mol
It works, bitches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2013, 03:21 PM (This post was last modified: 09-03-2013 06:09 PM by Full Circle.)
RE: Probability
(09-03-2013 02:18 AM)Phaedrus Wrote:  You still can't make the statement. Just like if you pull out 999 white marbles, there's no guarantee the next one won't be the single black marble.

Induction (essentially what you're talking about) is logically impossible. Induction works well, realistically, when performing tests that have a non-random (that is to say, deterministic) outcome, but as soon as probability is introduced, induction becomes worthless, except for developing a stochastic model (that is, an analysis of probability based on results so far).


Speaking of stochasticity I offered this link to Near and he posted it on his compendium. It is a very easy to understand Radio Lab show regarding this very subject and very entertaining.

Radio Lab - Stochasticity


Human beings cannot comprehend very large or very small numbers. It would be useful for us to acknowledge that fact. - Daniel Kahneman - Nobel prize-winning psychologist

"Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.” ~ Ambrose Bierce
“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man's reasoning powers are not above the monkey's." - Mark Twain in Eruption
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2013, 03:55 PM
RE: Probability
(09-03-2013 01:06 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(09-03-2013 12:51 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I probably could have chosen my words better there. The logic provides strong cause for anyone to be skeptical of a claim of a miracle.
What logic? What do miracles have to do with marbles?
Both words begin with the letter "M"????

"People don't go to heaven when they die; they're taken to a special room and burned!" Evil_monster
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like RaisdCath's post
09-03-2013, 07:29 PM
RE: Probability
(09-03-2013 02:05 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(09-03-2013 01:52 PM)Phaedrus Wrote:  You admitted to Vosur not 6 hours ago that this argument is flawed, mainly because you copied it off the blackboard without understanding it... That was less than twelve hours ago. Why are you posting it now when you know you're incorrect?

I admitted to Vosur that a poor choice of words on my part caused people to misunderstand the point I was trying to make....not that this argument is flawed. For instance you wrote a whole page about how it is impossible to calculate the probability of drawing a marble colored X without knowing the compostion of the bin.....which has nothing to do with the point I am making. I am not trying to calculate a probability. I am trying to show that the follow statement is true:

The more white marbles observed without ever observing a non-white increases the chances that all marbles are white.

If the proof provided that the above statement is true is incorrect, then show it to be incorrect.
NO

Knowledge is not either everything is 100% correct or it's 100% false, it's varying in degrees of correctness and error.

And your argument is the problem of induction which I addressed in this thread.
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid270218

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like fstratzero's post
09-03-2013, 08:52 PM
RE: Probability
I agree with you.
Within time deductive reasoning enjoys high probability, by virtue of the limitations of our on going "knowing"

Resigned 26/3/15 in consequence of banning re freedom of speech issues.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mr Woof's post
10-03-2013, 01:25 AM
RE: Probability
(09-03-2013 02:22 PM)Phaedrus Wrote:  You also did not correctly read my post, as it was primarily about the impossibility of determining the nature of the set (that is, what the probability of all the marbles being white) based on the information given. Read it again.

I agree you cannot calculate the probability of all marbles being white, but you can show the following statement is true:

The more white marbles observed without ever observing a non-white increases the chances that all marbles are white.

You show it is true by showing the P(X | An) is an increasing function of n.....which is what the proof did.

Vosur, Anjele, Hanoff.....have you learned nothing in my absence?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Heywood Jahblome's post
10-03-2013, 05:53 AM
RE: Probability
I reiterate:

(09-03-2013 03:06 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(09-03-2013 02:58 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Maybe if I were debating just one person it would make more sense to lay it out all at once, but I am not debating one person.
You could do that if you really wanted to. We have a special section for that called "The Boxing Ring" in which two people can debate on any given topic without being interrupted by anyone else.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-03-2013, 07:14 AM
RE: Probability
There's a lot of "I don't understand what you're saying but you're wrong and you're an asshole" posts in this thread.

This isn't rocket science. People trot out the word "probability" all the time.

If you investigate a million so-called miracles and they all have natural explanations, that would lead SOME to believe that it's probable that all miracles have natural explanations.

We can sit here and talk about how ideally no one does that because farts smell like roses, but we all know that there are plenty of people that think that way.

It's a simple argument. Some people think miracles are improbable because all the ones we've tested have natural explanations. All Wood is pointing out is that the fact that we haven't found one isn't proof that there aren't any just like pulling 999 white marbles out of a bin of marbles of unknown colours isn't proof that the last marble is white. Which is a fine point.

For all the haters, I'm not suggesting that there are miracles, so you can un-transfer your transfer of aggression and de-bunch/un-twist your panties Cool

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-03-2013, 07:40 AM (This post was last modified: 10-03-2013 07:44 AM by Vosur.)
RE: Probability
(10-03-2013 07:14 AM)Ghost Wrote:  All Wood is pointing out is that the fact that we haven't found one isn't proof that there aren't any just like pulling 999 white marbles out of a bin of marbles of unknown colours isn't proof that the last marble is white. Which is a fine point.
But that's not where the disagreement lies, since I and several other people who have posted in this thread agree with him on that.

What we disagree with is his claim that the more white marbles you draw out of a bin, the more likely it becomes that there are only white marbles in it. What people here have been pointing out is that this statement is an assumption at best and pure speculation at worst.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: