Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Dan Minette wrote:
So, I don't think it is helpful to make arguments based on one's own
axiom set and then expect them to sound "reasonable" to someone who
holds a different axiom set.
Or we can hold "all" sets of axioms, assign a prior probability
to each of them, then apply Bayesian analysis with real world
examples and get a posteriori probability for each sets. And
then decide based on some conservative criterium, like "do not
kill if it's murder with 5% or more probability".
Alberto Monteiro
Alberto--
Interesting, but there might be some obstacles. There are
an infinite number of axiom sets based on the pronouncements
of gods. I imagine that we would have some difficulty
agreeing on what probability to assign them. : )
(The obvious solution is to assign all gods probability
zero, but that too might prove unpopular...)
---David
Infinity is messy Maru
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
