Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that If there are uncountably many times at which one implements a mixed strategy with non-zero probability of wagering for God, then with probability 1 one ends up wagering for God at one of those times.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Probability-1 convergence in infinite trials does not entail that any finite agent actually performs the requisite uncountably many actions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Human deliberation and action are constrained to countable sequences, so the uncountable-trials model misrepresents the agent's actual decision situation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Applying measure-theoretic results about uncountable probability spaces to discrete rational agency commits a category error between mathematical idealization and normative decision theory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Zeno-style supertask completions presuppose a metaphysics of time permitting infinite divisibility of action, which is contested by both Aristotelian and quantum-discrete accounts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If supertasks are metaphysically impossible, the premise that uncountably many trials can be completed collapses, and the probability-1 guarantee never applies to any realizable agent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.With a continuum of times available, Robertson's proposed sequence of rolls can be completed in an arbitrarily short period.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.After completing that sequence, Monton's argument implies one should roll again.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A mathematical result shows that uncountably many independent trials each with non-zero probability of success yields success with probability 1.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.