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
    Therefore the claim that miracle evidence must always fai... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The evidential standard required to establish that a miracle has occurred is higher than that required for other unusual events

    Therefore the claim that miracle evidence must always fail a fixed evidential threshold confuses a static prior with the dynamic output of proper probabilistic inference.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Bayesian inference updates beliefs based on new evidence, making prior probabilities dynamic rather than fixed constraints.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Extraordinary evidence can rationally overcome low priors if the likelihood ratio sufficiently favors the miracle hypothesis.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Treating priors as unchangeable thresholds commits a category error by confusing initial assumptions with evidential reasoning.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Even under Bayesian updating, the prior against miracles remains epistemically justified by lawlike regularity of nature.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.No finite evidence can overcome an infinite prior improbability—the mathematical structure still constrains rational belief.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Calling priors 'dynamic' conflates posterior updating with abolishing principled skepticism about extraordinary claims.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedNatural Theology1 linked

    Related

    Bayesian inference updates beliefs based on new evidence, making prior probabili...Calling priors 'dynamic' conflates posterior updating with abolishing principled...Even under Bayesian updating, the prior against miracles remains epistemically j...Extraordinary evidence can rationally overcome low priors if the likelihood rati...
    +3 moreShow less
    No finite evidence can overcome an infinite prior improbability—the mathematical...The evidential standard required to establish that a miracle has occurred is hig...Treating priors as unchangeable thresholds commits a category error by confusing...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit