[MD] Probability

[Peter Corteen]

Hi Case,

you said:
Some previously unknown process at the heart
of the sun could result in the sun going Nova. At miniature black hole
traveling at near light speed could collide with the sun. An asteroid could
strike the earth so as to stop the earth's rotation.

Don't you accept that these examples would not happen during one day; a
sufficiently sized asteroid, for example, would be spotted months before it
struck Earth and there would come a day when we would say 'The sun will not
rise tommorrow'. I wish you well but the aneurysm wouldn't get you off the
hook either because then you could not say 'The sun will not rise tommorrow'
for you would be dead.
It is only in philosphy forums that people talk about having faith that the
sun will rise tommorrow; in any other situation it is never  considered, it
is an arificial use of language. I expect the sun will rise tommorrow but I
don't have faith that it will. Faith always stinks of religion to me. Having
faith in something is a waste of energy. Better to gather your information
and then make a considered guess about the future.

'Uncertainty destroys Trust, just as Trust destroys Uncertainty'; OK , sort
of, but: Quality destroys Trust, just as Trust destroys Quality, I don't
think so.

Regards

Peter


On 22/07/06, Case <Case at ispots.com> wrote:
>
> Ian, Gene, Peter and Joe,
>
> [Ian]
> Sorry Gene, but I can't let this pass ...
>
> The "sun rising tomorrow" stuff is not just a matter of statistical
> probability or faith.
>
> There are "explanatory" models of "why" the sun will rise tomorrow (or
> any day), based on scientific explanations of what a DAY IS.
>
> It's a meta-faith, a meta-belief system. A consistent holistic (or
> consilient, to use the Whewell / Wilson term) system of "faith"
> (understanding) that supports the fact that it will rise tomorrow ...
>
> Barring statistical emergent outcomes of (things we can blame on) the
> Israelis' hob nail boots trampling over a mass of humanity and
> geography, the sun will rise. And we know "why".
>
> [Case]
> Nothing in the uncertainty of physics or mathematics stands in the way of
> "explanatory" models. But even with consilience and determinism you can
> not
> eliminate uncertainty. Even in the case of the sun rising tomorrow. All
> sorts of things could happen. Some previously unknown process at the heart
> of the sun could result in the sun going Nova. At miniature black hole
> traveling at near light speed could collide with the sun. An asteroid
> could
> strike the earth so as to stop the earth's rotation.
>
> But closer to home I could have an aneurysm at any second and die. I don't
> think I need to catalog the varieties of quick check-outs the modern age
> has
> spawned. After all you can be working quietly in your office one morning
> and
> an airliner can come flying through the window.
>
> Believing that the sun will come up tomorrow is an act of pure faith. Any
> explanation, reasoned or emotional, is just window dressing.
>
>
> [Gene}
> At one point scientists believed that everything could be explained and
> understood, and that if we had the right euqations and a complete
> knowledge
> of how things are Right Now, we could determine how everything would be at
> a
> later time. However with the discovery of the uncertainty principle and
> quantum mechanics, most scientists have given up the ghost when it comes
> to
> determinism. Nothing is certain, things are only probable. We have a
> really
> Really good way to explain Why the sun comes up, and no one in their right
> minds seriously doubts that the sun will continue to do so for several
> million million more years. But there is no certainty. Only "beyond a
> reasonable doubt".
>
> [Case]
> I would not say that anyone has given up on determinism. Hopefully, we are
> just learning to see it differently. In chaos theory determinism still
> holds. It is just that the more precisely you want to specify your
> prediction the more information you need to be able to calculate. It
> becomes
> expedient to trade precision for clarity. So probability becomes a measure
> of how much uncertainty we are able to tolerate. When uncertainty exceeds
> tolerance; wars and religions can occur.
>
> In Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, Dee Brown gives AN account of how many
> of
> the North American tribes responded to European encroachment. Ignoring
> politics, what you see is that all of the tribes from the Algonquin to the
> Zuni used different strategies; from assimilation to terrorism. The result
> was the same. By 1890 almost every tribe was subdued, isolated or
> extinguished. In Nevada a spiritual movement sprang up and spread
> throughout
> the tribes at least as far east as the Mississippi. The Paiute prophet
> Wovoka promised his followers that if they danced the Ghost Dance, the
> Earth
> itself would roll aside taking the white men with it and leaving the world
> fresh for the red man. Dancers would be able to talk to their dead
> relatives
> and help bring about the coming of the new age.
>
> There was a collective spiritual response of peoples who had faced
> uncertainty upon uncertainty until the only rational thing to do was
> resort
> to the irrational. Different tribes isolated linguistically and
> geographically responded to the message. Despite these differences and in
> many cases historic animosities these people were united in a brief moment
> of Hope.
>
> In modern times we take pains to make see that our families are well
> insured.
>
>
> [Gene]
> And I don't see what Any of this has to do with faith. I have faith in
> science, I have faith in General Relativity. Thus I have faith the sun
> willcome up. I have faith in our explanations. It is impossible to Prove a
> scientific theory correct, all you do is use it until something proves it
> wrong. That's as good as it gets.
>
> Seems like faith works well in the situation.
>
> [Case]
> Faith inspires Hope and after all what is Hope but an expression of
> optimism
> in the face of uncertainty?
>
>
> [Peter]
> I appreciate Case's trial of new ideas but to say 'Uncertainty is Quality'
> does not have meaning for me.
>
> [Case]
> Why not?
>
> [Joe]
> In the modern esoteric literature of Gurdjieff, Ouspensky, Nicoll that I
> have read, structure plays an important role. Pirsig's study of Quality is
> important in that list for clarification. IMO the undefined aspect of
> quality occurs when levels of structure exist. The lower structure, though
> a
> part of the higher structure does not comprehend the higher structure, and
> the higher remains undefined to the lower.
>
> [Case]
> I can say as I put much stock in esoteric literature but what does Pirsig
> clarify? As I understand him, structure is SQ. I don't see what you mean
> about comprehension across structures but higher structures only come into
> existence to the extent that uncertainty is reduced in the level below. It
> is like fungus growing on a rock.
>
> [Joe]
> For example the statement: 'The sun will rise tomorrow morning' is based
> in
> trust, not probability. Uncertainty in trust destroys trust. I trust he
> means what he says., etc.
>
> [Case]
> Trust is another word rooted deeply in probability. To have Trust in a
> relationship is to introduce SQ. It makes interactions in the relationship
> more predictable. We use it to express confidence in our ability depend
> about consistency and predictability. In short, yes, Uncertainty destroys
> Trust, just as Trust destroys Uncertainty.
>
>
>
>
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>