The Null Hypothesis

[Pippy]

Your improvised??

Only one of us is saying 'I might be wrong'...

[Kyuuketsuki]

Your improvised?? Only one of us is saying 'I might be wrong'...

My mistake ... typo. It was "I'm impressed!"

So now I know that sarcasm works a lot better when you actually get it right ... doh!

Kyu

[Edwardo Piet]

Pippy, it doesn't matter how strong, weak, or interpretative your God belief is. Adding any belief into the equation without any support means the burden of proof is on you until you provide some valid evidence for it at least. Because the least complex hypothesis is otherwise without the belief - the null hypothesis.

EvF

[Ryft]

So by the null hypothesis, we would say god doesn't exist until proven to exist.

Ehh, no. That is the argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy. But hey, thanks for playing. (I'm seriously considering keeping track of who commits which fallacies and how often, for a Hall of Shame of a different sort.)

Smith is assumed to be innocent until otherwise demonstrated. I don't see a problem with that. And I have no idea what that has to do with any hypothesis.

The assumption of Smith's innocence is precisely the 'null hypothesis'. He is accused of a crime and, given probable cause, arrested and charged for it. But the criminal investigators and prosecuting attorneys do not pursue the case under the assumption of his guilt. To do so could have adverse effects on their collection of evidence and possibly overlook contradicting evidence. Rather, they work with something I think is analogous to the 'null hypothesis'—they assume he is innocent and try to find evidence to 'reject' or 'not reject' that hypothesis (which, as I said, is why the defendant is never pronounced 'innocent' but rather 'not guilty', because the evidence neither contradicted his innocence nor established it).

What does this have to do with God claims? Not a thing. You are as paranoid as Rhizomorph. It is about the 'null hypothesis' only and trying describe it in a way that anyone can understand (however imperfectly, given the nature of analogies). To say that God exists until proven otherwise is the exact same ad ignorantiam fallacy.

[Rhizomorph13]

What does this have to do with God claims? Not a thing. You are as paranoid as Rhizomorph. It is about the 'null hypothesis' only and trying describe it in a way that anyone can understand (however imperfectly, given the nature of analogies). To say that God exists until proven otherwise is the exact same ad ignorantiam fallacy.

Arcanus,

Now now, I was not being paranoid, just hopeful that you were going somewhere with this post. I didn't even assume that it was directly god related so much as I seriously wanted to know which two populations you were going to compare. Re-read my post and you will see what I mean.

Rhizo

[Kyuuketsuki]

What does this have to do with God claims? Not a thing. You are as paranoid as Rhizomorph. It is about the 'null hypothesis' only and trying describe it in a way that anyone can understand (however imperfectly, given the nature of analogies). To say that God exists until proven otherwise is the exact same ad ignorantiam fallacy.

There is a difference between experience and paranoia ... the difference is apparently one you fail to grasp.

If that is your purpose then fair enough ... I will wait and see if you are as honest as you implicitly claim.

Kyu

[Ryft]

There is a difference between experience and paranoia. The difference is apparently one you fail to grasp.

Your experiences with...? Right, not me. Hence paranoia, or a baseless suspicion of my motives. It would be nice if people could base their suspicions about me based on experiences with me.

[Kyuuketsuki]

There is a difference between experience and paranoia. The difference is apparently one you fail to grasp.

Your experiences with...? Right, not me. Hence paranoia, or a baseless suspicion of my motives. It would be nice if people could base their suspicions about me based on experiences with me.

My experience with other theists many of which appear to be like you so yes experience and not paranoia. You might be unique, hell you might be the second [expletive deleted] coming for all I know but my money is solidly on you having similar traits to those I have dealt with before.

If we dealt with the world your way none of us would learn a [expletive deleted] thing.

Kyu

[LEDO]

There is a difference between experience and paranoia. The difference is apparently one you fail to grasp.

Your experiences with...? Right, not me. Hence paranoia, or a baseless suspicion of my motives. It would be nice if people could base their suspicions about me based on experiences with me.

Maybe if you changed you avatar people would trust you.

Do I look like someone who has a plan?

[Rhizomorph13]

Ledo,

You look like someone I would have tank for me while I cast spells.

Rhizo