= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Nate_Gabriel comments on 2014 Survey Results - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (279)
The question for P(Supernatural) explicitly said "including God." So either LW assigns a median probability of at least one in 10,000 that God created the universe and then did nothing, or there's a bad case of conjunction fallacy.
Conjunctions do not work with medians that way. From what you quoted, it is entirely possible that the median probability for that claim is 0. You can figure it out from the raw data.
I don't understand. Since existence of God is explicitly included in the question about the existence of supernatural things, everybody should have put P(God) < P(Supernatural), and therefore the median also is lower (since for every entry P(God) there is a higher entry P(Supernatural) by that same person). So the result above should be weak evidence that a significant proportion of the LW'ers fell prey to the conjunction fallacy here, right?
No, I think that a god that does not interfere with the physical universe at all counts as not supernatural by the wording of the question.
My point was that the median of the difference of two data sets is not the difference of the median. (although it is still evidence of a problem)
Something else I noticed:
Agnostic: 156, 10.4% Lukewarm theist: 44, 2.9% Deist/pantheist/etc.: 22,, 1.5% Committed theist: 60, 4.0%
A true agnostic should be 50% on the probability of God, but we'll say 25-75% as reasonable. A lukewarm theist should be 50-100%. I don't like the deist wording, but we'll say 50-100% for them, and 75-100% for the committed theists. We then get:
10.4.25+2.9.5+1.5.5+4.75 = 7.8% P God as our lower bound Compared to the 8.26% actual
That's assuming all the atheists assigned a 0% probability to God. So it seems everybody is very close to their minimum on this; even likely below the minimum for some of them. My guess is a lot of people have some major inconsistencies in their views on God's existence.
1319 people supplied a probability of God that was not blank or "idk" or the equivalent thereof as well as a non-blank religion. I was going to do results for both religious views and religious background, but religious background was a write-in so no thanks.
Literally every group had at least one member who supplied a P(God) of 0 and a P(God) of 100.
Okay, I'll bite: What does someone mean when they say they are Atheist, and they think P(God) = 100% ?
Presumably "Yeah, God exists, but why should I care?". Or trolling/misunderstanding the question.
Wouldn't that be the very definition of a deist or an agnostic, instead of an atheist?
I didn't say that they were good at defining terms.
According to Descartes: for any X, P(X exists | X is taking the survey) = 100%, and also that 100% certainty of anything on the part of X is only allowed in this particular case.
Therefore, if X says they are Atheist, and that P(God exists | X is taking the survey) = 100%, then X is God, God is taking the survey, and happens to be an Atheist.
Either they're actually a misotheist, or they're using a nonstandard definition of "God" or of "atheist" (though I think at least the former was defined on the survey), or they misunderstood the question, or they're trolling.