Anselm’s ontological argument is wrong

[bahman]

Oy vey. How?

Opportunities increases.

Opportunities of what? We're just throwing dice.

Opportunities of having the life. We are just throwing the dice to check whether the chance of having life increases or not. The chance of having a specific side is P, where P is the probability of having the life in a box.

[Terrapin Station]

Opportunities increases.

Opportunities of what? We're just throwing dice.

Opportunities of having the life. We are just throwing the dice to check whether the chance of having life increases or not.

Lol--rolling dice has nothing at all to do with that.

[bahman]

Opportunities of what? We're just throwing dice.

Opportunities of having the life. We are just throwing the dice to check whether the chance of having life increases or not.

Lol--rolling dice has nothing at all to do with that.

It has. As I mentioned "The chance of having a specific side is P, where P is the probability of having the life in a box.".

[Terrapin Station]

Opportunities of having the life. We are just throwing the dice to check whether the chance of having life increases or not.

Lol--rolling dice has nothing at all to do with that.

It has. As I mentioned "The chance of having a specific side is P, where P is the probability of having the life in a box.".

You can't just stipulate that. If we're rolling dice, we only have frequentist data on dice rolls. If we're talking about "the probability of having life in a box," in order to have probability data for that, we need to have iterations of the box over x amount of time where we check whether life developed in the box or not.

[bahman]

Lol--rolling dice has nothing at all to do with that.

It has. As I mentioned "The chance of having a specific side is P, where P is the probability of having the life in a box.".

You can't just stipulate that. If we're rolling dice, we only have frequentist data on dice rolls. If we're talking about "the probability of having life in a box," in order to have probability data for that, we need to have iterations of the box over x amount of time where we check whether life developed in the box or not.

We are not interested to calculate P by experimenting. We assume it is nonzero. That is all we need.

[Terrapin Station]

It has. As I mentioned "The chance of having a specific side is P, where P is the probability of having the life in a box.".

You can't just stipulate that. If we're rolling dice, we only have frequentist data on dice rolls. If we're talking about "the probability of having life in a box," in order to have probability data for that, we need to have iterations of the box over x amount of time where we check whether life developed in the box or not.

We are not interested to calculate P by experimenting. We assume it is nonzero. That is all we need.

It's not all you need if you actually want to figure a frequentist probability. In that case you need actual iterations. That's the whole gist of frequentist versus Bayesian probability.

[bahman]

You can't just stipulate that. If we're rolling dice, we only have frequentist data on dice rolls. If we're talking about "the probability of having life in a box," in order to have probability data for that, we need to have iterations of the box over x amount of time where we check whether life developed in the box or not.

We are not interested to calculate P by experimenting. We assume it is nonzero. That is all we need.

It's not all you need if you actually want to figure a frequentist probability. In that case you need actual iterations. That's the whole gist of frequentist versus Bayesian probability.

If you are in a condition to take a trip that you know how much it would cost you. You are offered 1 or 2 million credits. Which one do you pick up? And why?

[Terrapin Station]

We are not interested to calculate P by experimenting. We assume it is nonzero. That is all we need.

It's not all you need if you actually want to figure a frequentist probability. In that case you need actual iterations. That's the whole gist of frequentist versus Bayesian probability.

If you are in a condition to take a trip that you know how much it would cost you. You are offered 1 or 2 million credits. Which one do you pick up? And why?

2 million, obviously. We have data about amounts of money and how it works.

[bahman]

It's not all you need if you actually want to figure a frequentist probability. In that case you need actual iterations. That's the whole gist of frequentist versus Bayesian probability.

If you are in a condition to take a trip that you know how much it would cost you. You are offered 1 or 2 million credits. Which one do you pick up? And why?

2 million, obviously. We have data about amounts of money and how it works.

In the same manner, I have data for how the amount of volume works for life.

[Terrapin Station]

If you are in a condition to take a trip that you know how much it would cost you. You are offered 1 or 2 million credits. Which one do you pick up? And why?

2 million, obviously. We have data about amounts of money and how it works.

In the same manner, I have data for how the amount of volume works for life.

Okay, talk about the source of that data a bit

[bahman]

2 million, obviously. We have data about amounts of money and how it works.

In the same manner, I have data for how the amount of volume works for life.

Okay, talk about the source of that data a bit

The opportunity for life is volume-dependent. What is the chance of having the life if the volume granted is negligible?

[Terrapin Station]

In the same manner, I have data for how the amount of volume works for life.

Okay, talk about the source of that data a bit

The opportunity for life is volume-dependent. What is the chance of having the life if the volume granted is negligible?

That's nothing about the source of your data. Talk about the source of your data.

[bahman]

Okay, talk about the source of that data a bit

The opportunity for life is volume-dependent. What is the chance of having the life if the volume granted is negligible?

That's nothing about the source of your data. Talk about the source of your data.

What is the chance of having the life if the volume granted is zero?

[Terrapin Station]

The opportunity for life is volume-dependent. What is the chance of having the life if the volume granted is negligible?

That's nothing about the source of your data. Talk about the source of your data.

What is the chance of having the life if the volume granted is zero?

Hello? The SOURCE OF YOUR DATA.

That needs to be empirical data. Frequentism is based on actual empirical data.Otherwise we're talking about Bayesian statistics.

[bahman]

That's nothing about the source of your data. Talk about the source of your data.

What is the chance of having the life if the volume granted is zero?

Hello? The SOURCE OF YOUR DATA.

That needs to be empirical data. Frequentism is based on actual empirical data.Otherwise we're talking about Bayesian statistics.

Come on. The chance for having the life in the zero volume is zero.