[Merged] Immortality & Bayesian Statistics

[Slowvehicle]

Loss Leader,

- I've numbered your points above for easy reference.
- Re #1, I will try to use Bayesian statistics to show that the position that we each have just one finite life to live is MUCH less probable than the total probability of all the other somewhat plausible positions re our personal conscious existence. Typically, I can commit about an hour a day to the topic, and as you can see I have received numerous questions and objections to answer, and addressing one leads to new Q’s and O’s to answer… In other words, I can only do so much, and unless some sort of spokesperson for the other side is willing to tell me which Q/O to answer next (which is actually what I’d prefer), I’m stuck with answering the one I personally find most deserving or profitable…
- Re #2, I think that’s a fair rendition of what I want to talk about, and I myself had wondered that it might fit better in mathematics than religion -- but I do believe that it supports religious belief.
- Re #’s 3 and 4, whatever category you think is most appropriate is fine with me – but, the thread is not intended to be about me.
- Thanks.

--- Jabba

(is there a "facepalm" smiley?)

Rich:

Do you remember when you tired this style of reasoning in your True Shroud™ thread? Do you remember what you were told?

It seems a shame that you tell your fellow shroudies how badly you are treated here, and then pull this kind of pointless evasion.

It is too late for this advice to be of any use to you in this thread, but I would like to offer you something to consider:
In the future, next time you are tempted to start a thread, marshal your arguments before you start the thread. Make your first post a clear statement, not of what you are going to say, when and if you have time, but of what you have to say. Don't explain that you are going to present an argument, just present the argument.

In other words, don't start a thread until you are ready to present, explain,and defend your position.

If I might offer one more kindly-meant piece of advice, don't try to manage the way other people participate. If multiple responses confuse you, take notes, and answer them one at a time. Don't ask for a "ringleader", or "spokesperson". If you have your arguments marshaled, if you know what you think, you can be prepared to respond to anyone who has a question. Be aware that, if this mob were just a bit more organized, we might qualify as an anarchy--if that is a situation in which you cannot effectively present your opinions and your support for them, consider finding another, more formal venue.

I am curious to see how you are going to support your claim that observed reality is less likely than whatever fantasy or fantasies you want to stack up against it.

 

[dlorde]

OK people, move along, nothing to see here.

The OP clearly just likes to think up some provocative statement, post it, then enjoy the attention and opportunity to post off-topic distractions, links to its website, and vague promises of what it will post on topic at some indeterminate future time.

Contentless, valueless.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Typically, I can commit about an hour a day to the topic[...]

It's taken you 6 hours to post your contributions to the thread so far?

 

[Jabba]

The best characterisation of this situation is that we have a reasonable prior probability that people will cheat somehow when it comes to dealing cards, and that four pat aces are evidence that supports the hypothesis that someone is playing silly buggers. The basis for this is that we have observed people getting up to all sorts of tricks with cards...

Kevin and the gang,

- That's the point. 4 aces is no more improbable than any other specific hand. But then, 4 aces does raise a somewhat plausible possibility that the other guy's hand is not simply random -- when most other specific hands would not raise that concern… That’s the point.
- My claim is that my own existence at this time does raise that kind of plausible possibility in regard to human mortality/immortality. And, if I stick that possibility into the Bayesian formula, I see that my existence right now is probably not a random hand dealt from a one-short-lifetime-deck.
- For those of you not familiar with the Shroud thread, I provide the whole argument at http://messiahornot.com/Act2Scene1.php and http://messiahornot.com/Act2Scene2.php. It’s long -- which is why I didn’t just lay it out over here. I was hoping to present it one step at a time over here…

- So now, besides dropping the whole issue, how would you guys like me to proceed?

--- Jabba

 

[Jabba]

It's taken you 6 hours to post your contributions to the thread so far?

Squeegee,
- Yes.
--- Jabba

 

[dlorde]

... my own existence at this time does raise that kind of plausible possibility in regard to human mortality/immortality.
...
- So now, besides dropping the whole issue, how would you guys like me to proceed?

Explain how you came to the conclusion above. What makes you think there is a plausible possibility of your immortality?

 

[Pixel42]

My claim is that my own existence at this time does raise that kind of plausible possibility in regard to human mortality/immortality.

How is your existence the equivalent of four aces rather than of a random selection of cards?

Any number of things could have happened differently to lead to someone other than you existing and that person would have just as much reason to think of themselves as the equivalent of four aces, i.e. none whatever.

And what has this argument got to do with immortality?

 

[zooterkin]

Kevin and the gang,

- That's the point. 4 aces is no more improbable than any other specific hand.

Yes.

But then, 4 aces does raise a somewhat plausible possibility that the other guy's hand is not simply random -- when most other specific hands would not raise that concern…

Given the previous sentence, why?

 

[carlitos]

Squeegee,
- Yes.
--- Jabba

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

- So now, besides dropping the whole issue, how would you guys like me to proceed?

How about presenting your entire argument, clearly and concisely, in this thread? You know, like you should have done in the OP.

 

[MRC_Hans]

- No one here accepts my description of what it is about some highly improbable events that make us suspect that they are not random. How would you describe what it is about some improbable events that makes us suspicious of their "randomality"?

--- Jabba

That is not correct. What we reject is your way to judge probability.

Hans

 

[Slowvehicle]

<snip> 4 aces is no more improbable than any other specific hand. But then, 4 aces does raise a somewhat plausible possibility that the other guy's hand is not simply random -- when most other specific hands would not raise that concern… That’s the point.<snip>
--- Jabba

Rich: If you understand that any specific hand of four cards is equally likely when dealt honestly form an honest deck, why does one hand convince you humans are immortal, while the other does not?

The only thing remarkable about 4 aces it that is is a memorable pattern.

 

[Jabba]

How about presenting your entire argument, clearly and concisely, in this thread? You know, like you should have done in the OP.

Squeegee,
- I assumed that it is too long to present here in one post.
--- Jabba

 

[Jabba]

Rich: If you understand that any specific hand of four cards is equally likely when dealt honestly form an honest deck, why does one hand convince you humans are immortal, while the other does not?

The only thing remarkable about 4 aces it that is is a memorable pattern.

Slowvehicle,
- No. It could mean a joke for a friendly opponent, or a lot of money for a stranger or unfriendly opponent.
--- Rich

 

[Slowvehicle]

Slowvehicle,
- No. It could mean a joke for a friendly opponent, or a lot of money for a stranger or unfriendly opponent.
--- Rich

In a game where a hand of 4 Aces had been assigned a special significance, yes.
But note: that "special significance" has been assigned to the hand of 4 Aces. The significance is not related to the probability of getting that specific hand.

A hand of any four specific cards has the same probability of being drawn as any other hand of four specific cards...

4, 9, Q, 7 is just as unlikely as A, A, A, A.
...unless and until you assign an artificial significance to the latter, because the pattern is memorable.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Squeegee,
- I assumed that it is too long to present here in one post.
--- Jabba

You assumed incorrectly. And you didn't post any of it in the OP.

Now, it's almost a week after you started this thread. As we're supposed to be discussing your take on immortality and Bayesian statistics, please post your argument about immortality and Bayesian statistics, in full, clearly and concisely.

 

[dafydd]

please post your argument about immortality and Bayesian statistics, in full, clearly and concisely.

I just saw a pig flying past my window so there may be a chance that Jabba will post his proof.

 

[Agatha]

Squeegee,
- I assumed that it is too long to present here in one post.
--- Jabba

No. This is not Twitter. I believe there is sometimes a limit on vBulletin posts, but since it's usually something like 60,000 characters it really need not concern you in this instance.

It is incredibly frustrating that almost a week after you started this thread, you still haven't posted anything about immortality and Bayesian statistics at all. If you have an argument or a point, just post it.

Put it all in one post, lay it out clearly and concisely.

 

[wollery]

- My claim is that my own existence at this time does raise that kind of plausible possibility in regard to human mortality/immortality.

For me, this is the most crucial part of your argument. You have completely failed to show any reason to suspect that you are in any way special, or that anyone is in any way special.

It's the question I keep asking you.

How do you know that you are the ace of spades rather than the three of clubs?

Claim it all you want, but your conclusion is totally founded on this assumption.

If you cannot show this to be true beyond any doubt then your conclusion will never be a proof. It will, at best, be an interesting mental exercise.

 

[carlitos]

How about presenting your entire argument, clearly and concisely, in this thread? You know, like you should have done in the OP.

Squeegee,
- I assumed that it is too long to present here in one post.
--- Jabba

If it's too long, then it isn't concise. Please try concise. It will make your argument much more convincing. (if you ever choose to make an argument, that is)