FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-14-2008, 12:12 PM   #31
~M~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Toronto.
Posts: 2,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by juergen View Post
Message for ~M~: What reading would you recommend me to check out?
Thanks!

juergen
The oxford handbook for Rationality (or via: amazon.co.uk) is good. i read the chapter on Bayesian reasoning and found nothing about what Oxymoron speaks of. I have also read Swinburne's Confirmation Theory (or via: amazon.co.uk)--a good book--and found nothing. Same with other books that i have read on the topic: nothing!

I'd like Oxymoron to source his claims.
~M~ is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 12:21 PM   #32
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South America
Posts: 1,856
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~M~ View Post
The oxford handbook for Rationality is good. i read the chapter on Bayesian reasoning and found nothing about what Oxymoron speaks of. I have also read Swinburne's Confirmation Theory--a good book--and found nothing.
Thanks!

Would you also have some more affordable recommendations?
juergen is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 01:16 PM   #33
~M~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Toronto.
Posts: 2,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by juergen View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~M~ View Post
The oxford handbook for Rationality is good. i read the chapter on Bayesian reasoning and found nothing about what Oxymoron speaks of. I have also read Swinburne's Confirmation Theory--a good book--and found nothing.

Why, yes.

Thanks!

Would you also have some more affordable recommendations?
Reasoning about Uncertainty (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Joseph Y. Halpern.
~M~ is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 01:24 PM   #34
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South America
Posts: 1,856
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~M~ View Post
Why, yes.
Thanks!

Edit: Oops, seems like one of the links disappeared.
juergen is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 02:23 PM   #35
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

No links should have disappeared - I have only edited them to standard IIDB format. If something is missing let me know.
Toto is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 02:27 PM   #36
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: South America
Posts: 1,856
Default

Here's the link, I could've already included it in my previous post. :banghead:

An Introduction to Probability and Inductive Logic (or via: amazon.co.uk)
juergen is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 02:31 PM   #37
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 19,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~M~
I'd like Oxymoron to source his claims.
What are your sources for your claims regarding theism? Well, er, uh, I dunno.
Johnny Skeptic is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 02:42 PM   #38
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: http://10.0.0.2/
Posts: 6,623
Default

From the father of modern Bayesianism:

Probability Theory: The Logic of Science (or via: amazon.co.uk) by E. T. Jaynes
Oxymoron is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 04:10 PM   #39
~M~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Toronto.
Posts: 2,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oxymoron View Post
From the father of modern Bayesianism:

Probability Theory: The Logic of Science (or via: amazon.co.uk) by E. T. Jaynes
Hi,

Is this your source? if so, please include a page number.
~M~ is offline  
Old 01-14-2008, 04:16 PM   #40
~M~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Toronto.
Posts: 2,796
Default

Quote:
Like most philosophers, you can't seem to distinguish what it is you're trying to explain using what as data. In this case, p(R|e) is the probability in the real world of the resurrection given the observed evidence. That conditional is everything. It doesn't work backwards. On the other hand, p(e|R) relates to a (potentially fictional) universe in which the resurrection has occured and gives us the probability that we would see the evidence e. It's the difference between observed and inferred, see?
Tell me more about this so called 'real world' as opposed to a 'fictional world'. And, why these would have bearing on the issue. Thanks.


It just seems odd that Swinburne, an eminent philosopher of science at Oxford University, and author of adored Confirmation Theory, would somehow miss this so-called occluding aspect. Moreover, it was Swinburne himself who I was going to refer to for a Bayesian-like account for the resurrection.
~M~ is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:03 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.