peterkirby:
Quote:
Hypothesis: God exists, God does not exist (G, ~G)
By God, I mean an intelligent creator of this universe.
|
That's a pretty vague definition, but we'll use it if you like.
Quote:
Outcomes: The universe is orderly, the universe is not orderly (O, ~O)
By order, I refer to regularities in nature.
|
Well, there is a continuum between order and disorder, so it would be a little difficult to strictly distinguish between the two cases. Still, I think I can go along with it for now.
Quote:
|
We will assume that there are intelligent beings in all universes in which the existence of God or the existence of order can be contemplated. The existence of intelligent beings will be represented by I, our background information.
|
Well, since contemplation presumably implies intelligent being, I am willing to go along with that.
Quote:
Background probabilities:
P( G | I ) = 0.5
P( ~G | I ) = 0.5
In other words, the existence of intelligent beings alone can tell us nothing about the existence of God, because intelligent beings must exist in either case in order for there to be contemplation. The existence of order that allows intelligent beings to exist might tell us something about the existence of God; the background probabilities above say nothing about that. As an aside, it is also good to select equal background probabilities if only for the reason of determining the effect of order on the question of God's existence. It is not excluded that there is other evidence that may affect these background probabilities.
|
Initially assinging P(G/I) = 0.5 appears to be an effort to sneak the God hypothesis in at the very beginning of your argument. There is no reason to grant that probability, since if you simply wished to indicate that the existence of intelligent beings tells us nothing about the existence of God, you simply could have written this:
P(G/I) = P(G)
P(~G/I) = P(~G)
Quote:
Anything is possible with God, so we shall assign equal probabilities to the two possible outcomes. In other words, God could create a universe in which things happen without naturalistic regularities in which intelligent beings exist just as easily as God could create a universe in which naturalistic regularities and intelligent beings co-exist.
P( O | G, I ) = 0.5
P( ~O | G, I ) = 0.5
|
It is not at all apparent that it would be possible for a God to create intelligent beings without some degree of regularity. For all you know, the number of possible worlds in which intelligent beings can exist may fall in proportion to the regularity of those worlds, which would skew the probabilities.
Quote:
Without God, it is quite nearly impossible for intelligent beings to evolve in a disorderly universe. If there are intelligent beings, then the universe is orderly, if there is no God. So we shall assign certainty to the idea that there is order given that there is no God and that there are intelligent beings in the universe.
P( O | ~G, I ) = 1
P( ~O | ~G, I ) = 0
|
As I said earlier, the number of possible worlds in which intelligent beings can exist may fall in proportion to the regularity of those worlds. It is not apparent that God has any effect on this. Of course, you mention evolution, so perhaps your argument rests upon the differences between direct creation and stepwise evolution, but if so you should make it explicit.
Quote:
Without God, it is quite nearly impossible for intelligent beings to evolve in a disorderly universe. If there are intelligent beings, then the universe is orderly, if there is no God. So we shall assign certainty to the idea that there is order given that there is no God and that there are intelligent beings in the universe.
P( O | ~G, I ) = 1
P( ~O | ~G, I ) = 0
|
Ah, but even if that is true it may not be impossible for them to
exist. You really have to make this dependence on evolution explicit in your argument.
In the end, you are totally unjustified in plugging any of your numbers into Bayes' Theorem or drawing any conclusions from it.
05-24-2002, 09:31 PM
