5 ms·

You could use agnostics vs atheists as an analog here. Most effectively atheist individuals are most likely technically agnostic because they are open to receiv

by adra 4y ago

You could use agnostics vs atheists as an analog here. Most effectively atheist individuals are most likely technically agnostic because they are open to receive new information in order to have their opinions on the matter changed. A hard Atheist would make their decision based on no evidence at all, and I think you'll find most atheists are at least open to be effectively sold on deism if it came out incontrovertibly (still waiting). All of this is the same with a crypto sceptic. I don't think you can assume crypto has to be a scam or more aptly a speculative investment scheme searching for a purpose. Some day, we could be convinced that crypto is super valuable for solving X, and the day it happens is the day I look to it with interest (still waiting).

lisper 4y ago
No, an atheist is one whose current Bayesian prior on the existence of God is close to zero. An agnostic is one whose current prior is close to 0.5. A theist's prior is close to one.
- MisterBastahrd 4y ago
  There are agnostic atheists and agnostic theists.
  - lisper 4y ago
    > agnostic atheists P ~= 0.3 > and agnostic theists P ~= 0.7
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  That's not how I see it, but I think it raises the interesting question. What is the need or value in coming to a definitive conclusion on something when it doesn't impact your daily life or choices. My personal opinion and observation is that many people choose to take a stance on topics despite having no need to do so. I think they would be better served remaining agnostic on most topics despite their priors leaning one way or another.
  - lalaland1125 4y ago
    > when it doesn't impact your daily life or choices I don't think this is correct. Theism vs atheism has pretty drastic impacts on how you live your life. If you believe that you are going to hell unless you do X, Y and Z, you are going to make sacrifices to accomplish those requirements.
    - cweagans 4y ago
      Living by any strict moral code sometimes requires sacrifice to be in compliance. Theism is not the only moral guardrail in peoples' lives.
    - s1artibartfast 4y ago
      The point was more general, about peoples need to eliminating uncertainty in favor of belief, but we can talk about religion too. I agree theism vs atheism might make a big difference, but I don't see a meaningful difference between agnosticism and atheism in how I would approach life. Even when it comes to ruling out theism and Gods, it only really matters if you rule out vengeful gods that might punish you for not worshiping them. If I were 90% certain that a god did not exist, What would I stand to gain by committing to atheism and holding it to be, absolute truth. I think a more mundane topics are a better example, e.g. the political or social topic of the day.
      - waterhouse 4y ago
        Well, there's the Pascal-style argument. If you think there's a 10% chance that a Christian God who will send you to hell if you do xyz exists, then, well, that seems like a very significant risk (compare to a "10% chance of death") and worth taking pains to avoid. On the other hand, if you think it's more like 1 in a million, and furthermore that there's a similar chance of other versions of God or other gods existing who have completely different demands on your behavior, then it's a lot more sensible to say "fuck it, I'm going to ignore such possibilities". Which is a practical difference. I do agree that lots of people would probably do better if they were more comfortable maintaining uncertainty in general.
      - 4y ago
- yunohn 4y ago
  Why are you making an argument with “Bayesian priors”? This doesn’t make it more convincing…
- viridian 4y ago
  Absurd. Gnosticism isn't some assumptive middle ground, it's a confidence interval. People can be agnostic about a countless number of gods, that doesn't mean they have some combined total belief in half the number of those gods actually existing.
  - lisper 4y ago
    No. This is a category error. Confidence intervals apply to things that can be quantified. God (with a capital G) either exists or He does not. There can be no confidence interval associated with that, only an assessment of belief. A polytheist could have a confidence interval on the number of gods (lower case g) that exist (e.g. "I am 90% sure that the number of gods is between 10 and 20"). But that is not typically what one is referring to when speaking of atheists and agnostics.

by adra 4y ago

lisper 4y ago

No, an atheist is one whose current Bayesian prior on the existence of God is close to zero. An agnostic is one whose current prior is close to 0.5. A theist's prior is close to one.

MisterBastahrd 4y ago
There are agnostic atheists and agnostic theists.
- lisper 4y ago
  > agnostic atheists P ~= 0.3 > and agnostic theists P ~= 0.7
s1artibartfast 4y ago
That's not how I see it, but I think it raises the interesting question. What is the need or value in coming to a definitive conclusion on something when it doesn't impact your daily life or choices. My personal opinion and observation is that many people choose to take a stance on topics despite having no need to do so. I think they would be better served remaining agnostic on most topics despite their priors leaning one way or another.
- lalaland1125 4y ago
  > when it doesn't impact your daily life or choices I don't think this is correct. Theism vs atheism has pretty drastic impacts on how you live your life. If you believe that you are going to hell unless you do X, Y and Z, you are going to make sacrifices to accomplish those requirements.
  - cweagans 4y ago
    Living by any strict moral code sometimes requires sacrifice to be in compliance. Theism is not the only moral guardrail in peoples' lives.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    The point was more general, about peoples need to eliminating uncertainty in favor of belief, but we can talk about religion too. I agree theism vs atheism might make a big difference, but I don't see a meaningful difference between agnosticism and atheism in how I would approach life. Even when it comes to ruling out theism and Gods, it only really matters if you rule out vengeful gods that might punish you for not worshiping them. If I were 90% certain that a god did not exist, What would I stand to gain by committing to atheism and holding it to be, absolute truth. I think a more mundane topics are a better example, e.g. the political or social topic of the day.
    - waterhouse 4y ago
      Well, there's the Pascal-style argument. If you think there's a 10% chance that a Christian God who will send you to hell if you do xyz exists, then, well, that seems like a very significant risk (compare to a "10% chance of death") and worth taking pains to avoid. On the other hand, if you think it's more like 1 in a million, and furthermore that there's a similar chance of other versions of God or other gods existing who have completely different demands on your behavior, then it's a lot more sensible to say "fuck it, I'm going to ignore such possibilities". Which is a practical difference. I do agree that lots of people would probably do better if they were more comfortable maintaining uncertainty in general.
    - 4y ago
yunohn 4y ago
Why are you making an argument with “Bayesian priors”? This doesn’t make it more convincing…
viridian 4y ago
Absurd. Gnosticism isn't some assumptive middle ground, it's a confidence interval. People can be agnostic about a countless number of gods, that doesn't mean they have some combined total belief in half the number of those gods actually existing.
- lisper 4y ago
  No. This is a category error. Confidence intervals apply to things that can be quantified. God (with a capital G) either exists or He does not. There can be no confidence interval associated with that, only an assessment of belief. A polytheist could have a confidence interval on the number of gods (lower case g) that exist (e.g. "I am 90% sure that the number of gods is between 10 and 20"). But that is not typically what one is referring to when speaking of atheists and agnostics.