0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Just started watching. I see they have episode 5 called "Prayers Might Work".
Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or strengthens one's prior personal beliefs or hypotheses.[1] It is a type of cognitive bias. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for desired outcomes, for emotionally charged issues, and for deeply-entrenched beliefs.People also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).A series of psychological experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way. However, even scientists and intelligent people can be prone to confirmation bias.[2]Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in political, organizational and scientific contexts.[3][4]. For example, confirmation bias produces systematic errors in research based on inductive reasoning.
a recognition of the limitations of science.
Crisis requires people to examine even the most basic of daily routines. I was told that in the SA army in the bush war troops were given 1 sheet of toilet paper a day.
When prayer doesn't work, they tend to forget it. But when it does work, they strengthen their believe to the power of their prayer. Hence, no matter how low the probability of their prayer to work, they tend to strengthen their believe to the power of their prayer.
Have a nice day.
I have (used to have an even better) excellent memory. I remember most occasions. Mine works most of the time - too many times for randomness.
Quote from: CliveG on 13/03/2020 17:15:34 I have (used to have an even better) excellent memory. I remember most occasions. Mine works most of the time - too many times for randomness.Post a diary.That will unequivocally show which side is right.
It struck me that the Alcoholics Anonymous requirement for faith in a Higher Power is one example of the statistical method to prove God exists.
Dogbert is right. Without the social upheavals of the past, the rich get richer for a number of reasons.
They also need to limit pollution, climate change and over-population. They cannot do this in good times. Hopefully they have the leadership to do it in bad times.
While on the topic of what is the best type of government, my research into religion also took me into research on types of government.Interestingly, one really good one is Fascism.
Quote from: CliveG on Today at 07:52:53 It struck me that the Alcoholics Anonymous requirement for faith in a Higher Power is one example of the statistical method to prove God exists. Then you need to re-read the stuff about confirmation bias.
from: CliveG on Today at 07:52:53 It struck me that the Alcoholics Anonymous requirement for faith in a Higher Power is one example of the statistical method to prove God exists.
ou are saying that any statistically proven evidence of God HAS to be confirmation bias (or another brain malfunction) BECAUSE science has proven that there is no God
Am I correct that you are saying that science has proven there is no God?
You keep using that in your logic.
You are so convinced that there is no God that you put all your faith in logical fallacies such as confirmation bias, faulty memories, pareidolia, hallucination and plain human imagination. What do you call your absolute faith in these explanations that leave not the slightest possibility for God or spirit as a possible explanation?
Maybe some-one could reduce your argument to a series of logical statements and see if I am correct that you incorporate the non-existence of God into your logic to arrive at the conclusions you do?
Quote from: CliveG on Today at 08:08:14 Dogbert is right. Without the social upheavals of the past, the rich get richer for a number of reasons. One such social upheaval is is the reduction of the influence of the churches.If their scriptures still held sway, we would still have slaves and witch burning.
You seem to forget that (at least on a science web page) the burden of proof is on you.
And I gave you a statistical scientific study that appears to prove that faith in God works.
Many of these "laws" are acknowledged as out dated.
People have believed in evil forces and people who do evil long before organized religion. In Zimbabwe, only a few decades ago the tribes would put a group of people (men, woman and children) into a hut and burn it down in order to remove the evil that was causing their crops to fail.
You do it with God and you do it with the Christian and Muslim religions. The others you give a pass for various reasons.
The burden of proof is now on you to prove that the study is in someway flawed - and the faith element is NOT due to the existence of God. All you have done is suggest another mechanism. Prove it is the only mechanism - and not God.
Quote from: CliveG on 14/03/2020 15:45:59Many of these "laws" are acknowledged as out dated.Christ didn't.He said they were here until the end of time.https://biblehub.com/matthew/5-18.htm
Quote from: CliveG on 14/03/2020 15:45:59People have believed in evil forces and people who do evil long before organized religion. In Zimbabwe, only a few decades ago the tribes would put a group of people (men, woman and children) into a hut and burn it down in order to remove the evil that was causing their crops to fail.You seem not to realise that those beliefs- that burning the people in the hut will help - are religion.It's especially ironic given thisQuote from: CliveG on 08/03/2020 12:55:50You do it with God and you do it with the Christian and Muslim religions. The others you give a pass for various reasons.Well that's exactly my point.I treat all the religions the same.You pretend that some are "good" and others aren't " organized religion".
Quote from: CliveG on 14/03/2020 15:51:40The burden of proof is now on you to prove that the study is in someway flawed - and the faith element is NOT due to the existence of God. All you have done is suggest another mechanism. Prove it is the only mechanism - and not God.That's absurd.If I said " Pixies did it - prove I'm wrong" you would recognise that it's not your job to explain away my fantastic idea.