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: July 20, 2025, 3:44 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style.
#72
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style.
(April 4, 2014 at 4:45 pm)Heywood Wrote: The two possibilities are indistinguishable in objective ways to determine their probability. And keep in mind we aren't talking about exact probabilities...it would be enough to simply have an objective means of showing the probability of A is greater than B or the probability of B is greater than A. We don't have that here.

That's bullshit. Besides which, if you don't have any way of determining probabilities, my first argument (here) that you are either a) making an argument from ignorance, or b) arguing on the basis of the most plausible hypothesis with a hypothesis whose plausibility is unknown, holds, and your argument fails, as neither argument can be successfully completed ('a' is fallacious, and 'b' argued using the principle of indifference yields no winner, even if accepted as an argument). [In arguing to the most plausible hypothesis, if there is no "most plausible" hypothesis, the entire argument fails as there is no reason to prefer one hypothesis to the other. If you say that there is a reason to prefer one hypothesis to the other, you've abandoned the principle of indifference. Either way, you lose.]

Besides, you gave four possibilities, so the odds of a designer are 25%, not 50%.
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply



Messages In This Thread
A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by Heywood - March 27, 2014 at 3:46 am
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by tor - March 27, 2014 at 3:54 am
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by John V - March 27, 2014 at 7:16 am
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by tor - March 27, 2014 at 7:17 am
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by tor - March 27, 2014 at 4:00 am
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by tor - March 27, 2014 at 4:04 am
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by tor - March 27, 2014 at 4:09 am
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by Alex K - March 27, 2014 at 4:21 am
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by Alex K - March 27, 2014 at 4:37 am
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by Alex K - April 4, 2014 at 10:22 am
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by Alex K - April 4, 2014 at 12:58 pm
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by Angrboda - April 4, 2014 at 7:18 pm
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by Tonus - March 27, 2014 at 1:19 pm
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by tor - March 27, 2014 at 7:11 am
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by Alex K - March 27, 2014 at 12:42 pm
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by tor - March 27, 2014 at 9:11 pm
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by tor - March 27, 2014 at 9:18 pm
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by Chas - March 28, 2014 at 11:14 am
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by Chas - April 5, 2014 at 11:11 pm
RE: A fined tuned argument.....Heywood style. - by tor - April 5, 2014 at 7:09 pm

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Old Style Evie/Why "gods" are bullshit. Edwardo Piet 52 13215 January 14, 2016 at 11:23 am
Last Post: Edwardo Piet
  Style over Substance Justtristo 6 2257 December 2, 2010 at 2:38 pm
Last Post: technophobe



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)