Sociopath Community

Major Major said: 

AliceInWonderland said:

3. The fraction of all beings with our level of intelligence created by other intelligences is close to one.

If the third proposition is the one that is true and almost all intelligences are created by other intelligences, then we are most probably created by an intelligence.

Hint hint. Spot the error. If "almost all intelligences are created by other intelligences," does it logically follow that we are most probably also created by an intelligence?

Be grateful that you have learned something new today.

 If over 50% of intelligences are created by other intelligences than there is over a 50% chance we are also created by an intelligence.

I don't even believe in intelligent design and the point she is making is completely logical. You're really focusing on the thirs bullet and not the condition that 3 is only true if 1 and 2 are untrue. Why not attack points 1 & 2? They are equally as valid

PalePeach said: 

Xena said: 

To an extent where she's contradicting herself.

 When did I contradict myself?

Oh my, why did I ignore you so far? You're even more fun than Alice. My deepest apologies, missus.

Major Major said: 

AliceInWonderland said:

3. The fraction of all beings with our level of intelligence created by other intelligences is close to one.

If the third proposition is the one that is true and almost all intelligences are created by other intelligences, then we are most probably created by an intelligence.

Hint hint. Spot the error. If "almost all intelligences are created by other intelligences," does it logically follow that we are most probably also created by an intelligence?

Be grateful that you have learned something new today.

The reasoning goes like this: 

Proposition 3 states the majority of all intelligences were created by other intelligences. 

If nearly all intelligences are created by other intelligences it is less probable that you are an intelligence not created by another intelligence. 

Since it's improbable that your an intelligence not created by another intelligence, it is probable that you are an intelligence created by another intelligence. 

That is what "If the third proposition is the one that is true and almost all intelligences are created by other intelligences, then we are most probably created by an intelligence" is stating and notice I include probable to imply the probabilistic nature of the argument. 

PalePeach said: 

 If over 50% of intelligences are created by other intelligences than there is over a 50% chance we are also created by an intelligence.

Oh my........

I don't even believe in intelligent design and the point she is making is completely logical. You're really focusing on the thirs bullet and not the condition that 3 is only true if 1 and 2 are untrue. Why not attack points 1 & 2? They are equally as valid

I pointed out that at least one statement is not logically correct.

AliceInWonderland said: 

If nearly most intelligences are created by other intelligences it is less probable that you are an intelligence not created by another intelligence.

Oh my you're making the same mistake as pale.

I will let you figure it out on your own instead of just outright telling you. That way it's more of a learning experience for you.

Major Major said: 

AliceInWonderland said: 

If nearly most intelligences are created by other intelligences it is less probable that you are an intelligence not created by another intelligence.

Oh my you're making the same mistake as pale.

I will let you figure it out on your own instead of just outright telling you. That way it's more of a learning experience for you.

Oof looks like you need a lesson in probability theory and logic. 

I can highly suggest Foundations of the Theory of probability  by Kolmogorov and Logical Foundations of Probability by Carnap. Both are gems, good luck!

lol so much projection. At least I got you to speak up about what's really bothering you  :D

Your above responses range from biased, to misinformed, to blatantly wrong lol

But I'm willing to spend a bit of time to get down to what's bothering you, now. The dialogue is getting cluttered, so I'll refer to every one of your responses between the black bars by number to make things more readable.

1) You believe I'm a blatant idiot who needs correcting. You poor thing. Wherever did you get that idea? lol

2) You altered the meanings of my statements by editing out the FANBOYS clauses. In case you hadn't noticed, I intentionally end many of my statements at the "but" to draw attention to the fact that I'm presenting both sides of a current debate, and to demonstrate that I'm not particularly attached to either side. When somebody jumps on half of an either/ or statement written in 2 parts, as if I've taken that side, I write it off as sloppy reading. When it happens twice or more, I assume that person has some kind of a grudge.

Hint: Some scientists believe that there have been as many as twenty extinction events in our planet's lifetime. It all comes down to interpretation.

3)You didn't state any specifics. So again, I posted a list of possibilities that could make a person believe that "the end is coming." You could have been referring to corona, or climate change, among other things.

4) So you have access to the numbers of microbial life on this planet, and proof that they've reached the precise tipping point that can indeed be called an Extinction Event?

5) Blatantly wrong. I'm not a narc lol I enjoy the life sciences, too. And it would appear that I have a whole lot less to prove than you  :D

I'll finish this up in another post bc this one is getting cluttered again.

AliceInWonderland said: 

Major Major said: 

AliceInWonderland said: 

If nearly most intelligences are created by other intelligences it is less probable that you are an intelligence not created by another intelligence.

Oh my you're making the same mistake as pale.

I will let you figure it out on your own instead of just outright telling you. That way it's more of a learning experience for you.

Oof looks like you need a lesson in probability theory and logic. 

I can highly suggest Foundations of the Theory of probability  by Kolmogorov and Logical Foundations of Probability by Carnap. Both are gems, good luck!

Oh, how disappointing... You can't follow your own advice and be "grateful for learning something new today."

Let me try this another way.....

AliceInWonderland said:

If most planets do not have an atmosphere, it is unlikely that we live on a planet with an atmosphere.

Do you now see why your statement is logically incorrect? This is a chance for you to learn.

Major Major said: 

AliceInWonderland said: 

Major Major said: 

AliceInWonderland said: 

If nearly most intelligences are created by other intelligences it is less probable that you are an intelligence not created by another intelligence.

Oh my you're making the same mistake as pale.

I will let you figure it out on your own instead of just outright telling you. That way it's more of a learning experience for you.

Oof looks like you need a lesson in probability theory and logic. 

I can highly suggest Foundations of the Theory of probability  by Kolmogorov and Logical Foundations of Probability by Carnap. Both are gems, good luck!

Oh, how disappointing... You can't follow your own advice and be "grateful for learning something new today."

Let me try this another way.....

Your criticism wasn't valid, I am very open to any valid ones though.

AliceInWonderland said:

If most planets do not have an atmosphere, it is unlikely that we live on a planet with an atmosphere.

Do you now see why your statement is logically incorrect? This is a chance for you to learn.

 You're not quite there yet because you haven't properly built equivalency. 

Check out On Singularities and Simulations by Dainton, he modifies Bostroms syllogism and builds a pretty solid equivalency. I have no doubt something similar to Daintons approach can be done to my hypothesis. If you don't have a university email or access to research libraries just let me know, I can pull the pdf for you.

PalePeach said: 

Xena said: 

To an extent where she's contradicting herself.

 When did I contradict myself?

 You told Major Major that he's defensive about his beliefs, implying that they're incorrect. 

I asked him directly if he believes that aliens could have created us, and he responded with a firm no.

You responded the same way to me, and my beliefs are much more fluid, as I've already stated a number of times. Maybe yes, maybe no, Idc.

If you believe both positions to be wrong, then you're contradicting yourself.

Yeah yeah. You're talking about a logical proposition.

But the proposition itself has a long history, decorated with some of the most lovably odd writings in textbooks.

I wasn't taking it all that srsly. I find it odd that you're taking this srsly enough to sling so many ad homs around over it.