Proof of Immortality, VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jabba said:
- Yes. That's why the likelihood of my current existence under materialism is virtually zero.
Click to expand...


Under the materialist model, all that is required for your existence to be an observable event is that your body exists. If you also have an immortal soul, your existence as an observable event still requires that your body exists.

This means that the likelihood of your existence as an observable event under your preferred model is equal to or less than the likelihood of your existence under materialism.

Now, would you like to show us what your formula looks like if H is the hypothesis that you have a body and an immortal soul?
 
Jabba said:
- I've told you how I arrived at virtually zero -- 10-100 is simply a relatively "weak" (I could have used 10-1000) numerical replacement for virtually zero.
Click to expand...

An "estimate" that you're prepared to revise by 900 orders of magnitude for no reason at all has to be the worst estimate ever.

Dave
 
Jabba, why do you think adding an immortal soul increases the likelihood of your body existing?
 
Jabba said:
- It did. I think that every sperm/ovum combination that never came about in all of time represents a potential self.
Click to expand...

Impossible combinations of sperm/ovum do not represent anything. Further, the very notion of “potential selves” indicates that you still insist that the self is a separate entity, yet you acknowledge that in the materialistic model no such entity exists. This is yet another problem you need to correct.
 
Jabba said:
- I've told you how I arrived at virtually zero -- 10-100 is simply a relatively "weak" (I could have used 10-1000) numerical replacement for virtually zero.
Click to expand...

In other words, you made it up completely. That's what you just said.

You have absolutely no reason to assign this value except that you WANT it to be very unlikely.

Here, I can do it too: I assign the probability of you existing at 1, and the probability of you existing AND having a soul at <1. Ergo, materialism wins.
 
Jabba said:
- Yes. That's why the likelihood of my current existence under materialism is virtually zero.
Click to expand...

What??? Did you just say that souls are inherently more likely? Based on what?

You've been told repeatedly that two entities (Body+Soul) existing are less likely than one of them (Body). This isn't hard to understand.
 
Jabba said:
- Yes. That's why the likelihood of my current existence under materialism is virtually zero.
Click to expand...


OK, let's apply some Bayesian reasoning to how we treat the observation of your existence as a new piece of information.

The likelihood that your current existence is observed is, you claim, virtually zero.

We know that people are often mistaken about what they observe, and often lie about things.

It is therefore far more likely that you are mistaken, or lying, about your observation of your existence than it is that you exist, so we should reject the new piece of information as a false positive.

Yes, I know it's ridiculous, but it is (essentially ;)) the consequence of your own argument.
 
Last edited:
Jabba said:
- I've told you how I arrived at virtually zero -- 10-100 is simply a relatively "weak" (I could have used 10-1000) numerical replacement for virtually zero.
Click to expand...

And it doesn't really matter what numerator you've invented when you've also invented an even larger denominator. Thank you for your admission to this JIL.
 
Jabba said:
- It did. I think that every sperm/ovum combination that never came about in all of time represents a potential self.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by "self" this time?

But you've just said that the materialist model doesn't include souls so how can there be a pool of potential ones in the materialist model?

The Jabba Immortal Lie.
 
Jabba said:
- Yes. That's why the likelihood of my current existence under materialism is virtually zero.
Click to expand...



And yet here you are.

Clearly, the odds were not in our favor.

All joking aside, your calculations are delusional nonsense. You are wrong. You have been given considerable detail into all the ways you are wrong. Actual statisticians have told you you were wrong.

And yet you persist. Why? What do you hope to gain in doubling down on being wrong?
 
Jabba said:
I think that every sperm/ovum combination that never came about in all of time represents a potential self.
Click to expand...
Jabba said:
- If materialism is true, immaterial souls do not exist.
Click to expand...


These two things cannot both exist. They are mutually exclusive. If you can't see that, then you certainly can't put together enough logic to even argue a coherent position.
 
Hey, Jabba, remember when you agreed that it was impossible for a brain & a soul to be more likely than a brain alone? And you you took the body as a given? Surely any neutral jury will note that you have now acknowledged that the brain is indeed all that’s needed under H to explain your existence. Which means you are now acknowdging that it is impossible for immortality to be more likely than H. Now would be a good time to man up and accept your loss.
 
Jabba said:
- Yes. That's why the likelihood of my current existence under materialism is virtually zero.
Click to expand...

No, that's why it's invalid for you to formulate it that way.

This is why mathematicians have consistently told you that you are profoundly ignorant of the methods and tools by which you propose to effect your proof. This is why you have gone back into hiding regarding the fatal flaws in your argument -- you are knowingly trying to hold forth the results of an errant formulation as if they were operative results.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom