the bayesian interpretation of probability is so based

[MysteriousWeeb420]

it's the formal "well that's just like your opinion bro" lol

[Altruist]

theology and science are as interchangeable as time* and space (observed through the prism of special relativity)

* speed is just a subset of time, and mass of space

[MysteriousWeeb420]

theology and science are as interchangeable as time* and space (observed through the prism of special relativity)

* speed is just a subset of time, and mass of space

who would you trust more: a scientist or a theologian?

[MVP]

Yes indeed

[Altruist]

theology and science are as interchangeable as time* and space (observed through the prism of special relativity)

* speed is just a subset of time, and mass of space

who would you trust more: a scientist or a theologian?

in this era, a scientist, clearly

i see you are still struggling to grasp my view on this topic. happens to brainwashed dogmatists

[MysteriousWeeb420]

theology and science are as interchangeable as time* and space (observed through the prism of special relativity)

* speed is just a subset of time, and mass of space

who would you trust more: a scientist or a theologian?

in this era, a scientist, clearly

i see you are still struggling to grasp my view on this topic. happens to brainwashed dogmatists

I understand it but I think it's stupid 

there was sufficient advancement in human knowledge and change in approach during scientific revolution that separation is justified

[Altruist]

theology and science are as interchangeable as time* and space (observed through the prism of special relativity)

* speed is just a subset of time, and mass of space

who would you trust more: a scientist or a theologian?

in this era, a scientist, clearly

i see you are still struggling to grasp my view on this topic. happens to brainwashed dogmatists

I understand it but I think it's stupid 

there was sufficient advancement in human knowledge and change in approach during scientific revolution that separation is justified

there is nothing unique in that separation, us perceiving it that way is just its operative function

nor is it a once in eternity phenomenon

so obv you arent quite there

[MysteriousWeeb420]

theology and science are as interchangeable as time* and space (observed through the prism of special relativity)

* speed is just a subset of time, and mass of space

who would you trust more: a scientist or a theologian?

in this era, a scientist, clearly

i see you are still struggling to grasp my view on this topic. happens to brainwashed dogmatists

I understand it but I think it's stupid 

there was sufficient advancement in human knowledge and change in approach during scientific revolution that separation is justified

there is nothing unique in that separation, us perceiving it that way is just its operative function

nor is it a once in eternity phenomenon

so obv you arent quite there

why do we perceive anything as separate? because we want to

[Munificent]

could you elaborate?

[MysteriousWeeb420]

could you elaborate?

essentially probabilities aren't real, they are just subjective interpretations of how likely an event is

[Munificent]

could you elaborate?

essentially probabilities aren't real, they are just subjective interpretations of how likely an event is

isnt this self evident?

everything that happens has a 100% probability of happening, probability is just a tool we use to understand phenomena with our limited knowledge 

is there even any other 'interpretation' of probability other than bayesian?

[Honest]

I remember writing something for myself about probability a while ago. 
I think it was a criticism of the belief of probability as an objective force, rather than a tool used in predicting future events; it's pretty silly to say "it could have happened differently", while taking probability into account; any outcome that occurred always had a 100% probability of occurring.

[MysteriousWeeb420]

could you elaborate?

essentially probabilities aren't real, they are just subjective interpretations of how likely an event is

isnt this self evident?

everything that happens has a 100% probability of happening, probability is just a tool we use to understand phenomena with our limited knowledge 

is there even any other 'interpretation' of probability other than bayesian?

you are being dogmatic. the true nature of randomness in the universe is not understood

yeah, classical, frequentist, propensity

[Munificent]

could you elaborate?

essentially probabilities aren't real, they are just subjective interpretations of how likely an event is

isnt this self evident?

everything that happens has a 100% probability of happening, probability is just a tool we use to understand phenomena with our limited knowledge 

is there even any other 'interpretation' of probability other than bayesian?

you are being dogmatic. the true nature of randomness in the universe is not understood

yeah, classical, frequentist, propensity

yeah, i considered that. 

arent classical, frequentist etc just different ways to define probability, not what probability actually measures?

[MysteriousWeeb420]

could you elaborate?

essentially probabilities aren't real, they are just subjective interpretations of how likely an event is

isnt this self evident?

everything that happens has a 100% probability of happening, probability is just a tool we use to understand phenomena with our limited knowledge 

is there even any other 'interpretation' of probability other than bayesian?

you are being dogmatic. the true nature of randomness in the universe is not understood

yeah, classical, frequentist, propensity

yeah, i considered that. 

arent classical, frequentist etc just different ways to define probability, not what probability actually measures?

they are interpretations. ie wtf does a 50% chance mean