3 ms·
Could be! Your estimate is as valid as mine. I suppose that to approach a topic like this, we can reason in the classical-logic manner of the ancient Greeks a
by upwardbound 3y ago
Could be! Your estimate is as valid as mine.
I suppose that to approach a topic like this, we can reason in the classical-logic manner of the ancient Greeks and others who sought to understand their universe without yet having the instruments to make necessary observations. What I mean is, without our civilization having seen evidence either way yet, the question of what is a good prior probability is only able to be informed through non-empirical means, such as the philosophy of science (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunrise_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunrise_problem ), philosophy of knowledge (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle ), and theology (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_of_all_possible_worlds https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_of_all_possible_worlds ).
Another similar topic about which we must reason without having yet made any applicable observations is the question of whether our universe is a simulation. If it is, then it is possible that a sufficiently well-constructed prayer (message to the system administrators) could have causal effects.
- jojobas 3y agoSorry, I can't help but perceive this as intellectual cowardice. "There has to be something that'll make our collective life not as finite and pointless as the evidence we have suggests!".