[Merged] Immortality & Bayesian Statistics

[dafydd]

Don't look back. You'll see your tail.

You think that humans have tails?

 

[abaddon]

Because you bogusly implied it is somehow a requirement to compare the expected likelhoods of other random objects in the universe in order to estimate the expected likelihood of my brain. Which I would already have done in order to make the meaningless comparison.

Don't look back. You'll see your tail.

Please explain how your brain is a non-random object in the universe.

 

[dafydd]

Please explain how your brain is a non-random object in the universe.

Goddidit by causing our parents to meet? If not then we truly are random creations, produced by unskilled labour.

 

[Slowvehicle]

We don't want to go there.

You haven't gotten past the probability-that-everything-that-exists-in-fact- exists-is-1, blanket denial of the entire science of probability stage.

Which "stage" is OT in a thread about using Bayes to "substantially prove" immortality.

 

[dafydd]

Which "stage" is OT in a thread about using Bayes to "substantially prove" immortality.

Is that the same as 'essentially prove'? I suspect that both terms mean 'totally fail to prove'.

 

[dafydd]

My parents met by chance, therefore my brain is a product of chance. If that is not true then their meeting must have been planned by some non-human agency.

 

[Toontown]

Please explain how your brain is a non-random object in the universe.

Why, in this dense little monkey hell, would I do that?

In what sense would estimating my brain's expected likelihood not require the presumption that it is a random object in the universe?

 

[dafydd]

Why, in this dense little monkey hell, would I do that?

In what sense would estimating my brain's expected likelihood not require the presumption that it is a random object in the universe?

In no sense. We are in agreement. Why the childish insults? Have you read the MA?

 

[Toontown]

Because your brain is a random object in the universe. Why would you treat it any differently?

Because you bogusly implied it is somehow a requirement to compare the expected likelhoods of other random objects in the universe in order to estimate the expected likelihood of my brain. Which I would already have done in order to make the meaningless comparison.

Don't look back. You'll see your tail.

Why is that bogus?

For the reason I explained in the post you responded to.

You have this odd habit of asking questions immediately after they're answered.

Is your internet slow?

Why should you treat the expected likelihood of your brain differently than the expected likelihood of any other random object in the universe?

For the same reason anyone who wanted to test a hypothesis would treat any random object differently from any other random object in the universe. To test a hypothesis.

I kept telling you not to look back. And now you've seen your tail.

 

[godless dave]

For the reason I explained in the post you responded to.

Your post explained nothing of the kind.

 

[Toontown]

OK, boys and girls. You have succeeded in your assigned task of pushing the offending analogy off the front page.

Your mission for the day (such as it is) has been accomplished.

 

[Slowvehicle]

OK, boys and girls. You have succeeded in your assigned task of pushing the offending analogy off the front page.

Your mission for the day (such as it is) has been accomplished.

You mean, continuing to ask what in the shoes of a Marmot-Stalking Stevenson this all has to do with immortality?

 

[dafydd]

You have this odd habit of asking questions immediately after they're answered.

I noticed that too. I'm a smart monkey.

 

[godless dave]

Every object in the universe exists because of a series of individually unlikely events.

 

[Toontown]

Your post explained nothing of the kind.

Because you bogusly implied it is somehow a requirement to compare the expected likelhoods of other random objects in the universe in order to estimate the expected likelihood of my brain. Which I would already have done in order to make the meaningless comparison.

Perhaps you found a loophole, or perhap I found it for you. I should have said "you bogusly implied it is somehow a requirement to compare the expected likelihood of my brain to the expected likelhoods of other random objects in the universe in order to estimate the expected likelihood of my brain. Which I would already have done in order to make the meaningless comparison."

 

[dafydd]

Perhaps you found a loophole, or perhap I found it for you. I should have said "you bogusly implied it is somehow a requirement to compare the expected likelihood of my brain to the expected likelhoods of other random objects in the universe in order to estimate the expected likelihood of my brain. Which I would already have done in order to make the meaningless comparison."

This thread is meaningless. The expected likelihood of your brain existing is dependent on how your patents met. Care to put a percentage on that?

 

[Toontown]

Every object in the universe exists because of a series of individually unlikely events.

And some series of individually unlikely events are useful for testing certain hypotheses because the hypothesis says something about the expected likelihood of their observation.

 

[dafydd]

And some series of individually unlikely events are useful for testing certain hypotheses because the hypothesis says something about the expected likelihood of their observation.

What does it say? Give us some examples of these hypotheses please.

 

[godless dave]

Perhaps you found a loophole, or perhap I found it for you. I should have said "you bogusly implied it is somehow a requirement to compare the expected likelihood of my brain to the expected likelhoods of other random objects in the universe in order to estimate the expected likelihood of my brain. Which I would already have done in order to make the meaningless comparison."

How is it a meaningless comparison?

An asteroid, comet, or grain of sand exists because of a series of individually unlikely events.

A particular brain exists because of a series of individually unlikely events.

Why is the latter remarkable but the rest are not?

 

[Toontown]

This thread is meaningless. The expected likelihood of your brain existing is dependent on how your patents met. Care to put a percentage on that?

That doesn't even scratch the surface. Give a couple of hadrons a slight push shortly after the big bang, and this entire solar system wouldn't exist.