Timeline for How valid is assignment of probabilites when evidence is totally lacking, as in Pascal's Wager?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 10, 2019 at 0:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPhilosophy/status/1159977663865528325 | ||
| Aug 7, 2019 at 2:28 | comment | added | Donate to the Edhi Foundation | Fair enough. :) :D Let's work towards giving you best answers possible. | |
| Aug 5, 2019 at 4:03 | comment | added | Josh | @TautologicalRevelations I'm sure that some philosophers, such as Kant, reject this sort of probability. What I'm looking for is what the philosophical community as a whole thinks. Is this an overwhelmingly popular idea, or is there still debate? | |
| Jul 27, 2019 at 16:16 | comment | added | Donate to the Edhi Foundation | I'm not sure about the probabilistic implications of Kant. Do you want a citation of Kant? | |
| Jul 27, 2019 at 15:49 | comment | added | Donate to the Edhi Foundation | Another strange example of a Pascal Wager-like argument is exploring outer space, contingent on the universe being infinite. Do you accept this kind of answer? When you get into the topic of infinite gain, you enter some very strange territory of philosophy. | |
| Jul 27, 2019 at 15:48 | comment | added | Donate to the Edhi Foundation | There is a Pascal Wager-like argument in favour of infinite life/immortality, where evidence of infinite spans is either inconclusive and/or delegated to myth and legend. Is this an acceptable style of answer to your question? | |
| Jul 26, 2019 at 16:36 | vote | accept | Josh | ||
| Jul 26, 2019 at 9:22 | history | edited | Conifold |
edited tags
|
|
| Jul 26, 2019 at 9:05 | history | edited | Conifold | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title
|
| Jul 26, 2019 at 9:02 | answer | added | Conifold | timeline score: 7 | |
| Jul 26, 2019 at 2:08 | history | asked | Josh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |