(May 4, 2025 at 1:33 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:Yes but we are talking about personal credulity thus far, and one can set as low, or high, a bar for that as one wishes. For me it would be meaningless to talk of probability, when one has no objective evidence of possibility.(May 4, 2025 at 1:22 pm)Angrboda Wrote: I can see both sides. Take the example of a unicorn. If one is going by a strict definition of a creature that has all the attributes of the mythical animal, a white, single-horned, horse-like creature that can only be captured by a virgin, then the odds of such are fairly slim. On the other hand, if one means a single horned quadruped that is similar enough to the legend to have given rise to the legend, then the possibilities are broader. So it really depends on whether you mean a head that is a literal plastic beach ball, or a head that only resembles a beach ball.
Right; we should be able to reason about entirely mythical things, and even rank them in terms of their biological probability, a unicorn being more likely than a mermaid. I actually remember coming across a similar conversation in the following New Yorker article:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/...ss-monster
Though of course people are free to believe whatever they wish, I have spoken with flat earthers, and their arguments are not more absurd than those presented by YEC's I have encountered.
