Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: January 8, 2025, 6:13 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Did Dawkins and Tyson say that and what are the implications.
#61
RE: Did Dawkins and Tyson say that and what are the implications.
(January 3, 2013 at 4:03 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:
(January 3, 2013 at 3:44 pm)Mark 13:13 Wrote: was there something wrong with the maths?

What's scientifically untestable can't be a part of science. Math can't fix that. It's not a theory if it can't be tested. It's not even a hypothesis if it can't be tested in principle. For God to be part of a scientific theory, it would have to be possible to prove that God is NOT the correct explanation. Probability doesn't enter into it at all.

No place for probability in science mmmh
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/probab...interpret/
"Probability is virtually ubiquitous. It plays a role in almost all the sciences. It underpins much of the social sciences — witness the prevalent use of statistical testing, confidence intervals, regression methods, and so on. It finds its way, moreover, into much of philosophy. In epistemology, the philosophy of mind, and cognitive science, we see states of opinion being modeled by subjective probability functions, and learning being modeled by the updating of such functions. Since probability theory is central to decision theory and game theory, it has ramifications for ethics and political philosophy. It figures prominently in such staples of metaphysics as causation and laws of nature. It appears again in the philosophy of science in the analysis of confirmation of theories, scientific explanation, and in the philosophy of specific scientific theories, such as quantum mechanics, statistical mechanics, and genetics. It can even take center stage in the philosophy of logic, the philosophy of language, and the philosophy of religion. Thus, problems in the foundations of probability bear at least indirectly, and sometimes directly, upon central scientific, social scientific, and philosophical concerns."


"No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right;
a single experiment can prove me wrong."
Albert Einstein
Reply



Messages In This Thread
RE: Did Dawkins and Tyson say that and what are the implications. - by Mark 13:13 - January 3, 2013 at 4:38 pm

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Dawkins, Rowling, Sunak et al on Trans Issue and Women's Rights. Nishant Xavier 63 5380 July 15, 2023 at 12:50 am
Last Post: Paleophyte
  Neil DeGrasse Tyson on Disproving God Mechaghostman2 158 36621 July 14, 2021 at 3:52 pm
Last Post: arewethereyet
  Dawkins loses humanist title Silver 165 12497 June 6, 2021 at 1:45 am
Last Post: Peebothuhlu
  Richard Dawkins interviews Saudi Arabian atheist Rana Ahmad AniKoferBo 2 957 July 22, 2020 at 12:40 pm
Last Post: Brian37
  Ricky Gervais won Dawkins award this year Fake Messiah 13 2979 September 6, 2019 at 8:25 pm
Last Post: brewer
  Dawkins writing kid's version of "The God Delusion" - you mad bro? Silver 35 7524 August 2, 2018 at 9:08 pm
Last Post: brewer
  Geoff Robson has a hardon for Dawkins Silver 7 1976 May 10, 2018 at 5:55 pm
Last Post: Edwardo Piet
  What are your thoughts on Richard Dawkins? NuclearEnergy 96 16321 December 6, 2017 at 3:06 am
Last Post: Bow Before Zeus
  Why Anarcho-Capitalism Is a Canard and Its Implications for Atheism log 110 16738 January 19, 2017 at 11:26 pm
Last Post: TheRealJoeFish
  Hitchens, Dawkins, Hawking, Ehrman, Coin, Sagan: Where are the Woman? Rhondazvous 44 5436 January 14, 2017 at 5:31 pm
Last Post: Mr Greene



Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)