Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: You Can't Disprove a Miracle
March 15, 2016 at 12:32 pm
You have to demonstrate something is possible before it can be considered a probable explanation for anything.
It's not up to us to prove it impossible. We don't even need to say it is.
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: You Can't Disprove a Miracle
March 15, 2016 at 1:47 pm
(March 15, 2016 at 12:19 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: (March 15, 2016 at 12:01 pm)SteveII Wrote: Using the same example above, are eyewitness accounts of the event, timing, and context sufficient to increase the probability of an event having a supernatural cause versus a natural one?
You're still arguing that low probability events equal miracles. No they don't. Low probability events equal low probability events. The probability cannot demonstrate that it has a supernatural cause, only evidence of an actual supernatural cause can do that. Eyewitness accounts to unexplained events, even if held to be reliable, even given certain context, do not show the supernatural.
Precisely. Miracles are a oart of the equation we have no business even getting to yet. None of the groundwork has been done first. Steve (not yours truly) wants us to go from "Something weird just happened, which only I saw. What are the odds?" to "Yay miracles!" and just leave it at that.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 3045
Threads: 14
Joined: July 7, 2014
Reputation:
14
RE: You Can't Disprove a Miracle
March 15, 2016 at 1:51 pm
(March 15, 2016 at 12:19 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: (March 15, 2016 at 12:01 pm)SteveII Wrote: Using the same example above, are eyewitness accounts of the event, timing, and context sufficient to increase the probability of an event having a supernatural cause versus a natural one?
You're still arguing that low probability events equal miracles. No they don't. Low probability events equal low probability events. The probability cannot demonstrate that it has a supernatural cause, only evidence of an actual supernatural cause can do that. Eyewitness accounts to unexplained events, even if held to be reliable, even given certain context, do not show the supernatural.
C lick here for a Wikipedia article on Bayesian inference and probability theory. Probability theory says that you not just assess the probability of an event and make your conclusion, but you must update that probability given any new evidence, information or conditions (timing, context, etc.).
" The posterior probability of a hypothesis is determined by a combination of the inherent likeliness of a hypothesis (the prior) and the compatibility of the observed evidence with the hypothesis (the likelihood)."
You can run the formula for each hypothesis (H) and compare.Let's do the crippled man:
P(E/H) x P(H)
P(H/E) = ------------------------------
P(E)
H = Hypothesis, man was healed by Jesus
E = man walks, including timing and context
P(E/H) - probability of E given the hypothesis that Jesus can heal = .90
P(H) - probability that Jesus can heal cripple before E was observed = .01
P(E) - likelihood that E happened without H (call it "natural causes") = .05
.9 x .01
18% = ----------------
.05
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: You Can't Disprove a Miracle
March 15, 2016 at 1:55 pm
I think we're justified in saying that you won't be able to make a compelling case for any of this, other than hypothetically, otherwise you'd have done it by now.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: You Can't Disprove a Miracle
March 15, 2016 at 1:56 pm
(This post was last modified: March 15, 2016 at 1:58 pm by robvalue.)
(March 15, 2016 at 12:04 pm)robvalue Wrote: Still waiting to hear when I asserted supernatural events cannot happen.
I take it you're retracting this then.
I know all about probability. Coming up with a low probability proves absolutely nothing. It doesn't prove the mere possibility of anything else. Improbable events happen all the time.
It's the argument from ignorance, again. (Current earnings £247,298)
Posts: 3045
Threads: 14
Joined: July 7, 2014
Reputation:
14
RE: You Can't Disprove a Miracle
March 15, 2016 at 2:03 pm
(March 15, 2016 at 1:56 pm)robvalue Wrote: (March 15, 2016 at 12:04 pm)robvalue Wrote: Still waiting to hear when I asserted supernatural events cannot happen.
I take it you're retracting then.
I know all about probability. Coming up with a low probability proves absolutely nothing.
I'm sorry for saying you asserted that supernatural events cannot happen. I got confused with multiple posts.
Probability theory certainly does not prove anything, but does illustrate that hypothesis can be weighed against each other and clearly illustrates that the more evidence and contextual support given to a possible miracle, the less quickly we should dismiss it.
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: You Can't Disprove a Miracle
March 15, 2016 at 2:04 pm
(This post was last modified: March 15, 2016 at 2:09 pm by robvalue.)
No problem.
I am aware of hypothesis testing.
Your null hypothesis is that it happened "by nature"? You're assuming you are aware of everything nature is capable of. How do you know this?
You're just going by our understanding of nature so far, and assuming it's more or less complete.
Why are you assuming Jesus healing isn't natural?
And...
You're running it on a story out of a book. You can't be serious.
Posts: 66485
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: You Can't Disprove a Miracle
March 15, 2016 at 2:07 pm
(This post was last modified: March 15, 2016 at 2:12 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Did the equation magically become capable of determining the probability that a cause was supernatural since the last time you tried to foist it on us Steve...is -that- the miracle.....?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: You Can't Disprove a Miracle
March 15, 2016 at 2:08 pm
I can't believe what I'm reading. I can't continue this discussion, it's ridiculous.
Posts: 3045
Threads: 14
Joined: July 7, 2014
Reputation:
14
RE: You Can't Disprove a Miracle
March 15, 2016 at 2:20 pm
(March 15, 2016 at 2:04 pm)robvalue Wrote: No problem.
I am aware of hypothesis testing.
Your null hypothesis is that it happened "by nature"? You're assuming you are aware of everything nature is capable of. How do you know this?
You're just going by our understanding of nature so far, and assuming it's more or less complete.
Why are you assuming Jesus healing isn't natural?
And...
You're running it on a story out of a book. You can't be serious.
Our understanding of nature is complete enough for this exercise. Go ahead and move P(E) around. I gave it a generous number because given the timing and context of the story, it should be way lower.
I don't care if you like the story or not. It illustrates the point.
|
