= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Gunnar_Zarncke comments on A resolution to the Doomsday Argument. - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (86)
See LW wiki's Doomsday Argument for reference.
The problem I have with this kind of reasoning is that it causes early reasoners to come to wrong conclusions (though 'on average' the reasoning is most probably true).
Any argument from probabilities will cause unlucky reasoners to come to wrong conclusions, but that doesn't stop us from arguing from probabilities.