Rocks with bad intentions
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-08-2015, 06:08 AM
RE: Rocks with bad intentions
(15-08-2015 06:04 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(15-08-2015 05:59 AM)Chas Wrote:  No, that is a sideshow. Where in the universe do you see intent?

In the weighted die.

What weighted die? I see no weighted die. Where in the universe do you perceive intent?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
15-08-2015, 06:29 AM
Rocks with bad intentions
(15-08-2015 06:08 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(15-08-2015 06:04 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  In the weighted die.

What weighted die? I see no weighted die. Where in the universe do you perceive intent?

I guess I'm ignored now because I was too blunt in my assessment of his dishonesty and intellect. Weeping how will I go on?


Oh, I know Drinking Beverage

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2015, 06:33 AM
RE: Rocks with bad intentions
(15-08-2015 06:08 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(15-08-2015 06:04 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  In the weighted die.

What weighted die? I see no weighted die. Where in the universe do you perceive intent?

Of course you see a weighted die, we're the result of it.

What insured that conscious self-aware creatures, with moral and creative capacities would inevitably arise at some point, given enough time and space?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2015, 06:34 AM
Rocks with bad intentions
(15-08-2015 06:33 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(15-08-2015 06:08 AM)Chas Wrote:  What weighted die? I see no weighted die. Where in the universe do you perceive intent?

Of course you see a weighted die, we're the result of it.

What insured that conscious self-aware creatures, with moral and creative capacities would inevitably arise given enough time and space?

Facepalm

Universe was not made for us or life. Life adapted to the universe.

I mean, for fuck's sake, this is basic evolutionary theory.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2015, 07:17 AM
RE: Rocks with bad intentions
(15-08-2015 05:32 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(14-08-2015 07:21 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  All of this is irrelevant unless you can actually demonstrate intent.

You can't.

By "demonstration" you mean provide proof of intent?

Like in the observation of the DICE that rolled 20s, a hundred times straight. That in order to "demonstrate" that the dice were weighted, we'd have to inspect the dice, rather than infer it from the rolls? Pointing out the dice rolled 20s a hundred times in a row wouldn't demonstrate for you that they were weighted, right?

Quite right. It would also fail to demonstrate it for anyone else, since just pointing out the odds against one particular string of rolls means nothing. Unlikely things happen all the time, with dice. It's what dice are for.

(15-08-2015 06:33 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Of course you see a weighted die, we're the result of it.

That isn't because of a weighted die.

(15-08-2015 06:33 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  What insured that conscious self-aware creatures, with moral and creative capacities would inevitably arise at some point, given enough time and space?

Nothing. It was never ensured. It simply happened anyway.

I'd say that this is the circular logic fallacy, but you honestly don't even get that far. "I know that we were intended to exist because the die is weighted, and I know that the die is weighted because..."

...nothing, apparently. It just is.

It's not a particularly compelling argument.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2015, 07:47 AM (This post was last modified: 15-08-2015 09:48 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: Rocks with bad intentions
(15-08-2015 07:17 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Quite right. It would also fail to demonstrate it for anyone else, since just pointing out the odds against one particular string of rolls means nothing. Unlikely things happen all the time, with dice. It's what dice are for.

Yet, it’s enough, for us to know where to place our bets.

I don’t think you’ve answered this question either. Is an observation of a die rolling 20s a hundred times in a row, evidence (while not proof) of the die being weighted?

Quote:Nothing. It was never ensured. It simply happened anyway.

Let’s ask a different question. Given a fairly weighted 6 sided die, let say that rolled a One, on the first roll, Two, Four, A Three, A Two on the subsequent rolls, if I keep on rolling the die, the probability that I’ll eventually roll a Six approaches 1, correct? But even though this approaches closer to 1 the more the dies are rolled, you wouldn’t say that rolling a six eventually, given enough time, is ensured?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2015, 10:07 AM
RE: Rocks with bad intentions
(15-08-2015 07:47 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Yet, it’s enough, for us to know where to place our bets.

I don’t think you’ve answered this question either. Is an observation of a die rolling 20s a hundred times in a row, evidence (while not proof) of the die being weighted?

No.

It is reason to investigate the possibility. It is not, of itself, evidence.

But let us grant, for the moment, that it is. You still have no evidence that any dice were involved in the formation of the universe at all, let alone that they had to be weighted in order to turn up like this.

(15-08-2015 07:47 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
Quote:Nothing. It was never ensured. It simply happened anyway.

Let’s ask a different question.

Your lack of actual response to the point is quite telling, since it is central to the discussion.

(15-08-2015 07:47 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Given a fairly weighted 6 sided die, let say that rolled a One, on the first roll, Two, Four, A Three, A Two on the subsequent rolls, if I keep on rolling the die, the probability that I’ll eventually roll a Six approaches 1, correct?

No.

This is just the gambler's fallacy taken to its extreme. The probability of rolling a six on an unweighted die is always one in six. The die does not care what it rolled before.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Unbeliever's post
15-08-2015, 12:11 PM
RE: Rocks with bad intentions
(14-08-2015 06:27 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Did you really just attempt to imply that religion has no direction as far as persons behaviour?

No, I did not. I specifically said deism does not inform one's behaviour.

Can you read?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2015, 01:26 PM
RE: Rocks with bad intentions
(15-08-2015 06:29 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I guess I'm ignored now because I was too blunt in my assessment of his dishonesty and intellect. Weeping how will I go on?


Oh, I know Drinking Beverage

With coffee?

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RocketSurgeon76's post
15-08-2015, 01:34 PM
RE: Rocks with bad intentions
(15-08-2015 06:33 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(15-08-2015 06:08 AM)Chas Wrote:  What weighted die? I see no weighted die. Where in the universe do you perceive intent?

Of course you see a weighted die, we're the result of it.

What insured that conscious self-aware creatures, with moral and creative capacities would inevitably arise at some point, given enough time and space?

That's also why I use the term "fluke" with no qualms. Absolutely nothing said we would "invariably" arise.

See, we're not talking about the dice-rolls, themselves, but what the results of various dice-rolls would have been. In other words, in gamer terms, we're talking about the chart, not the dice. This universe's laws, each assumed to have been set by one of those rolls, which allowed us to come into being as we are, are just one result on the chart. And that's fine! But to assume that someone consulted the chart, said "I want THIS universe to happen", and then weighted each die to make sure the "right number" came up, is not a conclusion that can be drawn simply from the fact that dice were rolled and a result was reached.

YOU like the result, so you're projecting favorable intent onto the rolls, which is really all theism is, in a nutshell. There's nothing in this universe to suggest it cares a whit about whether we're here or not, or that it was meant for us in any way. Nothing, that is, except our own hubris.

I'm reminded of a passage from one of my favorite books, Ishmael, by Daniel Quinn:
(Collapsible, so those who want to read it can, but those who don't won't have to.)
“This story takes place a half a billion years ago-an inconceivably long time ago, when this planet would be all but unrecognizable to you. Nothing at all stirred on the land except the wind and the dust. Not a single blade of grass waved in the wind, not a single cricket chirped, not a single bird soared in the sky. All these things were tens of millions of years away in the future.
But of course there was an anthropologist on hand. What sort of world would it be without an anthropologist? He was, however a very depressed and disillusioned anthropologist, for he'd been everywhere on the planet looking for someone to interview, and every tape in his knapsack was as blank as the sky. But one day as he was moping alongside the ocean he saw what seemed to be a living creature in the shallows off shore. It was nothing to brag about, just sort of a squishy blob, but it was the only prospect he'd seen in all his journeys, so he waded out to where it was bobbing in the waves.
He greeted the creature politely and was greeted in kind, and soon the two of them were good friends. The anthropologist explained as well as he could that he was a student of life-styles and customs, and begged his new friend for information of this sort, which was readily forthcoming. ‘And now’, he said at last, ‘I'd like to get on tape in your own words some of the stories you tell among yourselves.’
‘Stories?’ the other asked.
‘You know, like your creation myth, if you have one.’
‘What is a creation myth?’ the creature asked.
‘Oh, you know,’ the anthropologist replied, ‘the fanciful tale you tell your children about the origins of the world.’
Well, at this, the creature drew itself up indignantly- at least as well as a squishy blob can do- and replied that his people had no such fanciful tale.
‘You have no account of creation then?’
‘Certainly we have an account of creation,’ the other snapped. ‘But its definitely not a myth.’
‘Oh certainly not,’ the anthropologist said, remembering his training at last. ‘Ill be terribly grateful if you share it with me.’
‘Very well,’ the creature said. ‘But I want you to understand that, like you, we are a strictly rational people, who accept nothing that is not based on observation, logic, and scientific method.’
‘"Of course, of course,’ the anthropologist agreed.
So at last the creature began its story. ‘The universe,’ it said, ‘was born a long, long time ago, perhaps ten or fifteen billion years ago. Our own solar system-this star, this planet, and all the others- seem to have come into being some two or three billion years ago. For a long time, nothing whatever lived here. But then, after a billion years or so, life appeared.’
‘Excuse me,’ the anthropologist said. ‘You say that life appeared. Where did that happen, according to your myth- I mean, according to your scientific account.’
The creature seemed baffled by the question and turned a pale lavender. ‘Do you mean in what precise spot?’
‘No. I mean, did this happen on land or in the sea?’
‘Land?’ the other asked. ‘What is land?’
‘Oh, you know,’ he said, waving toward the shore, ‘the expanse of dirt and rocks that begins over there.’
The creature turned a deeper shade of lavender and said, ‘I cant imagine what you're gibbering about. The dirt and rocks over there are simply the lip of the vast bowl that holds the sea.’
‘Oh yes,’ the anthropologist said, ‘I see what you mean. Quite. Go on.’
‘Very well,’ the other said. ‘For many millions of centuries the life of the world was merely microorganisms floating helplessly in a chemical broth. But little by little, more complex forms appeared: single-celled creatures, slimes, algae, polyps, and so on.’
‘But finally,’ the creature said, turning quite pink with pride as he came to the climax of his story, ‘but finally jellyfish appeared!”

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: