Abishai100
VIP Member
- Sep 22, 2013
- 4,959
- 250
- 85
Can we measure faith with an analysis of probability models?
Probability Theory tells us that we can predict the outcome of events based on an analysis of the configuration of initial-state variables (by determining the rates and ratios and likelihood of catalytic events).
If it's raining outside, we might say (on faith), "I doubt I will get a cold/flu from walking in the rain today without an umbrella, since I'm feeling very optimistic!" but we might say (with Probability Theory), "There is only a 30% chance I will get a cold/flu from walking in the rain today without an umbrella, since if I walk real fast and am under the rain for a shorter amount of time, the chance that my body will absorb some water-borne cold virus is little!"
How we determine the consequences of our behavior is important for our modern age of contract-based politics and culture (e.g., Wall Street, eTrade, European Union, NATO, etc.).
Perhaps evil is integrally related to speculation --- the assumption of results without any grounding in evidence, precedence, or even prior states of well-being (or 'memories of faith').
When we speculate, we are in danger of imposing our perspective on 'sensible courage' onto others --- e.g., "These African pygmies will surely appreciate modern technology, since Americans love technology!"
Here's a mock-dialogue about probability, faith, and courage between Shiva (Hindu god of destruction) and Pennywise (the fictional demonic clown from the iconic Stephen King pedestrian-horror novel It), two 'folk mythos' avatars who represent differing metaphysical views on 'self-control.'
We could perhaps use such discussions to better evaluate cultural differences between taste and bias (e.g., cuisines, fashion, astrological views, etc.).
====
SHIVA: Why do human beings love to gamble (e.g., Las Vegas)?
PENNYWISE: Humans despise assuming that fortune is random.
SHIVA: If we assume that fortune can be 'predicted,' we might 'over-speculate' on danger.
PENNYWISE: That's the point. Humans yearn to 'control' danger.
SHIVA: Perhaps those suffering from gambling addictions are 'prophets.'
PENNYWISE: Yes, just as alcoholics were 'prophets' of yesteryear!
SHIVA: Should mathematicians be assigned to measure causality (and consequence)?
PENNYWISE: The basis of science is the desire to predict change.
SHIVA: Perhaps it is best conclude that humans simply 'learn from the past.'
PENNYWISE: History always repeats itself.
SHIVA: Can you measure faith?
PENNYWISE: You can certainly measure dissatisfaction.
====
Probability Theory tells us that we can predict the outcome of events based on an analysis of the configuration of initial-state variables (by determining the rates and ratios and likelihood of catalytic events).
If it's raining outside, we might say (on faith), "I doubt I will get a cold/flu from walking in the rain today without an umbrella, since I'm feeling very optimistic!" but we might say (with Probability Theory), "There is only a 30% chance I will get a cold/flu from walking in the rain today without an umbrella, since if I walk real fast and am under the rain for a shorter amount of time, the chance that my body will absorb some water-borne cold virus is little!"
How we determine the consequences of our behavior is important for our modern age of contract-based politics and culture (e.g., Wall Street, eTrade, European Union, NATO, etc.).
Perhaps evil is integrally related to speculation --- the assumption of results without any grounding in evidence, precedence, or even prior states of well-being (or 'memories of faith').
When we speculate, we are in danger of imposing our perspective on 'sensible courage' onto others --- e.g., "These African pygmies will surely appreciate modern technology, since Americans love technology!"
Here's a mock-dialogue about probability, faith, and courage between Shiva (Hindu god of destruction) and Pennywise (the fictional demonic clown from the iconic Stephen King pedestrian-horror novel It), two 'folk mythos' avatars who represent differing metaphysical views on 'self-control.'
We could perhaps use such discussions to better evaluate cultural differences between taste and bias (e.g., cuisines, fashion, astrological views, etc.).
====
SHIVA: Why do human beings love to gamble (e.g., Las Vegas)?
PENNYWISE: Humans despise assuming that fortune is random.
SHIVA: If we assume that fortune can be 'predicted,' we might 'over-speculate' on danger.
PENNYWISE: That's the point. Humans yearn to 'control' danger.
SHIVA: Perhaps those suffering from gambling addictions are 'prophets.'
PENNYWISE: Yes, just as alcoholics were 'prophets' of yesteryear!
SHIVA: Should mathematicians be assigned to measure causality (and consequence)?
PENNYWISE: The basis of science is the desire to predict change.
SHIVA: Perhaps it is best conclude that humans simply 'learn from the past.'
PENNYWISE: History always repeats itself.
SHIVA: Can you measure faith?
PENNYWISE: You can certainly measure dissatisfaction.
====