- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]

From: Wei Dai <weidai.domain.name.hidden>

Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 01:36:51 -0700

When I learn a new way to thinking I tend to forget how to think the old

way. I just typed into Mathematica "N[Pi]" and it displayed to me

"3.14159". So I think that gives me reason to believe the first 6 digits

in the decimal expansion of Pi is 3.14159 because if it wasn't the case

my current experience would be very atypical. More formally, the

probability that I am reading "N[Pi] = 3.14159" given that the first 6

digits of Pi is not 3.14159 is very small compared to the probability that

I am reading "N[Pi] = 3.14159" given that the first 6 digits of Pi IS

3.14159.

This and similar kinds of reasoning depend on the Strong SSA (as defined

by Hal and Nick). I think it's strange that something that seems vital to

any kind of reasoning that takes into account sense experiences does not

have a more prominent place in philosophy. How do people who have never

heard of the Strong SSA or do not accept it justify believing that the

first 6 digits of Pi is 3.14159 (assuming they have evidence but not proof

of this fact) without reference to the Strong SSA?

Received on Tue Jun 01 1999 - 01:37:50 PDT

Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 01:36:51 -0700

When I learn a new way to thinking I tend to forget how to think the old

way. I just typed into Mathematica "N[Pi]" and it displayed to me

"3.14159". So I think that gives me reason to believe the first 6 digits

in the decimal expansion of Pi is 3.14159 because if it wasn't the case

my current experience would be very atypical. More formally, the

probability that I am reading "N[Pi] = 3.14159" given that the first 6

digits of Pi is not 3.14159 is very small compared to the probability that

I am reading "N[Pi] = 3.14159" given that the first 6 digits of Pi IS

3.14159.

This and similar kinds of reasoning depend on the Strong SSA (as defined

by Hal and Nick). I think it's strange that something that seems vital to

any kind of reasoning that takes into account sense experiences does not

have a more prominent place in philosophy. How do people who have never

heard of the Strong SSA or do not accept it justify believing that the

first 6 digits of Pi is 3.14159 (assuming they have evidence but not proof

of this fact) without reference to the Strong SSA?

Received on Tue Jun 01 1999 - 01:37:50 PDT

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:06 PST
*