It appears to me a more concrete example would help your readers, QuantumT. Such as, assign propositions regarding some kind of knowledge to the letters, including Y and Z, and maybe probabilities of letters pointing to (or implying or suggesting) other letters. If I get your general drift, that is.Arising_uk wrote: ↑Thu Jul 05, 2018 9:27 amI think some of us are still trying to understand where your Y and Z are?QuantumT wrote:...
Edit:
It's been 5 days now since I wrote the above. Does nobody understand this?
Probability
-
- Posts: 406
- Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 6:54 am
- Location: USA
Re: Probability
-
- Posts: 5181
- Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm
Re: Probability
Certainly, your diagram and related rules don't mean that
p(Y and Z) = ¼
or do they?
p(Y and Z) = ¼
or do they?
Re: Probability
I should probably just stay out of this. But there are several people conducting what seem to be rational conversations regarding the nature and location and probabilities of X and Y.
But it is manifestly clear that the OP's exposition does not show any X or Y nor does the OP define them.
I pressed the OP a bit on this point and did not receive a satisfactory response.
Can any of you sane-acting responders explain to me why you would attempt to engage rationally with someone who discusses X and Y in his argument but never defines them and doesn't show them on his diagram??
Why are some of you even trying to reason yourselves about X and Y? X and Y are not defined. They are not on the diagram. There is no rational thesis being presented.
The argument of the OP is so far outside of the usual framework of an argument that I can't accord it any degree of rationality. I can't comprehend attempting to engage rationally with someone who asks you the probability of Y without telling you what Y is, and who shows you a diagram on which Y is not to be found
tl;dr: What are you all talking about? If I'm missing something here, please do let me know.
But it is manifestly clear that the OP's exposition does not show any X or Y nor does the OP define them.
I pressed the OP a bit on this point and did not receive a satisfactory response.
Can any of you sane-acting responders explain to me why you would attempt to engage rationally with someone who discusses X and Y in his argument but never defines them and doesn't show them on his diagram??
Why are some of you even trying to reason yourselves about X and Y? X and Y are not defined. They are not on the diagram. There is no rational thesis being presented.
The argument of the OP is so far outside of the usual framework of an argument that I can't accord it any degree of rationality. I can't comprehend attempting to engage rationally with someone who asks you the probability of Y without telling you what Y is, and who shows you a diagram on which Y is not to be found
tl;dr: What are you all talking about? If I'm missing something here, please do let me know.
-
- Posts: 406
- Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 6:54 am
- Location: USA
Re: Probability
In my case, I may not be able to claim sanity. However, given my interest in probability theory, I'm hoping that the diagram somehow represents an under-specified but interesting puzzle in that theory ... (benefit of doubt, maybe). And I have a little more time on my hands than usual ...
Re: Probability
QuantumT,
Probability is a human attempt at predicting.
That premiss is false. All knowledge is not encapsulated facts but is relationships between 'facts', and moreover those relationships are in constant states of dynamic change. 'All knowledge'is open ended without finality.If all knowledge is symbolized by the 24 letters A-X:
Probability is a human attempt at predicting.
-
- Posts: 5181
- Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm
Re: Probability
If all knowledge is truth, Y is truth or a subset thereof.
-
- Posts: 4368
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: Probability
Y and Z are pointlessQuantumT wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 10:02 pm If all knowledge is symbolized by the 24 letters A-X:
Each letter can point towards one of the 23 others and to Y.
Six of them can point to one of the 23 others and to Y and Z.
How probable is Y and Z then?
Logicly Y is the one being pointed most to.
So, if all knowledge favors Y, is Y then the truth?
-Imp
- Arising_uk
- Posts: 12314
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: Probability
You are annoying but you do always make a point.
Re: Probability
That's exactly what I was trying to show. With each individual item of knowledge pointing in its own direction, and none of them agreeing, it is truly dynamic. But If all items of knowledge can point in two (or more) directions, we might - might - find something true, if they agree about one of them.Belinda wrote: ↑Sat Jul 07, 2018 4:45 pm That premiss is false. All knowledge is not encapsulated facts but is relationships between 'facts', and moreover those relationships are in constant states of dynamic change. 'All knowledge'is open ended without finality.
Probability is a human attempt at predicting.
Re: Probability
QuantumT wrote:
The undiscovered variable then. That variable which permits cosmic order.But If all items of knowledge can point in two (or more) directions, we might - might - find something true, if they agree about one of them.