Jump to content

Search the forums

Theme Settings

Slate Cloud Plum Berry Lime Orange

Man of Science, Man of Faith


  • Please log in to reply
302 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_Nrsimhadeva_*

Guest_Nrsimhadeva_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 June 2009 - 02:48 AM

Intuition v.s. Logic



Go.
  • 0

#2 Pyramid Head

Pyramid Head
  • umbiciles
  • 1561 posts

Posted 05 June 2009 - 02:49 AM

Intuition v.s. Logic



Go.



logic always wins
  • 0

#3 sass

sass
  • umbiciles
  • 5718 posts
  • Interests:Guy Sensei!

Posted 05 June 2009 - 02:49 AM

both OMG
  • 0

#4 Remedy Malahide

Remedy Malahide

    Do not punish yourself; you deprive the world of its purpose.

  • umbiciles
  • 11429 posts
  • From:Brontë country
  • Nemesis:hippies

Posted 05 June 2009 - 02:54 AM

As I said in my last post, intuition with regard to things like coincidences is basically little more than a primitive statistical judgement of the likelihood of the two (or however many) events occurring. We tend to be pretty bad at judging that sort of thing.

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Sally_Clark

ally Clark (August 1964 – 15 March 2007)[1] was a British solicitor who became the victim of a famous miscarriage of justice when she was wrongly convicted of the murder of two of her sons.

...
The case was widely criticised because of the way statistical evidence was misrepresented in the original trial, particularly by Sir Roy Meadow, former Professor of Paediatrics at the University of Leeds. He stated in evidence as an expert witness that "one sudden infant death in a family is a tragedy, two is suspicious and three is murder unless proven otherwise". He claimed that, for an affluent, non-smoking family like the Clarks, the probabilty of a single cot death was 1 in 8,543, so the probability of two cot deaths in the same family was around "1 in 73 million" (8543 × 8543). Given that there are around 700,000 live births in Britain each year, Meadow argued that a double cot death would be expected to occur once every hundred years.[5]

In October 2001, the Royal Statistical Society (RSS) issued a public statement expressing its concern at the "misuse of statistics in the courts".[4] It noted that there was "no statistical basis" for the "1 in 73 million" figure.[4] In January 2002, the RSS wrote to the Lord Chancellor pointing out that "the calculation leading to 1 in 73 million is invalid".[10] There are several reasons why this is the case.

Firstly, Meadow's calculation was based on the assumption that two SIDS deaths in the same family are independent of each other. The RSS argues that "there are very strong reasons for supposing that the assumption is false. There may well be unknown genetic or environmental factors that predispose families to SIDS, so that a second case within the family becomes much more likely than would be a case in another, apparently similar, family."[10] The prosecution did not provide any evidence to support this assumption;[10] Ray Hill argues that, in fact, "after a first cot death the chances of a second become greatly increased".[11]

Secondly, it is likely that the court committed a statistical error known as the "prosecutor's fallacy".[10][11][12] Many press reports of the trial reported that the "1 in 73 million" figure was the probability that Clark was innocent. However, even if the "1 in 73 million" figure were valid, this should not have been interpreted as the probability of Clark's innocence. In order to calculate the probability of Clark's innocence, the jury needed to weigh up the relative likelihood of the two competing explanations for the children's deaths. Although double SIDS is very rare, double murder is likely to be rarer still, so the probability of Clark's innocence was quite high.

Hill raises a third objection to the "1 in 73 million" figure: the probability of a child dying from SIDS is 1 in 1,300, not 1 in 8,500. Meadow arrived at the 1 in 8,500 figure by taking into account three key characteristics possessed by the Clark family, all of which make SIDS less likely. However, Meadow "conveniently ignored factors such as both the Clark babies being boys – which make cot death more likely".[11] Hill argues:[11]

When a cot death mother is accused of murder, the prosecution sometimes employs a tactic such as the following. If the parents are affluent, in a stable relationship and non-smoking, the prosecution will claim that the chances of the death being natural are greatly reduced, and by implication that the chances of the death being homicide are greatly increased. But this implication is totally false, because the very same factors which make a family low risk for cot death also make it low risk for murder.

During the second appeal, the court noted that Meadow's calculations were subject to a number of qualifications, but "none of these qualifications were referred to by Professor Meadow in his evidence to the jury and thus it was the headline figures of 1 in 73 million that would be uppermost in the jury's minds".[5] The appeal court concluded that "the evidence should never have been before the jury in the way that it was when they considered their verdicts". The judges continued, "we rather suspect that with the graphic reference by Professor Meadow to the chances of backing long odds winners of the Grand National year after year it may have had a major effect on [the jury's] thinking notwithstanding the efforts of the trial judge to down play it".

...

According to her family, Clark was unable to recover from the effects of her conviction and imprisonment.[15] After her release, her husband said she would "never be well again".[1] She was unable to read John Batt's book based on her case, Stolen Innocence: A Mother's Fight for Justice.[1]

Clark was found dead in her home in Hatfield Peverel in Essex on 16 March 2007.[1][3] It was originally thought that she had died of natural causes,[8][16] but an inquest ruled that she had died of acute alcohol intoxication, though the coroner stressed that there was no evidence that she had intended to commit suicide



http://en.wikipedia....rainbow#Petwhac

A way to get an idea of how to use the petwhac is as follows. Say you see a friend from school you have not seen for years when you are on holiday (an unlikely event); before saying it is fate or coincidence, think what is in the petwhac (meeting any friend from the same time period at least, friends of your brothers, sisters or parents, old flames, neighbours, teachers, someone who worked in the local chip-shop... the list is probably endless, and all would seem coincidental). In short: the bigger the petwhac, the stronger case you have to avoid ascribing something to fate or coincidence.

...

If somebody's watch stopped three weeks after the spell was cast, even the most credulous would prefer to put it down to chance. We need to decide how large a delay would have been judged by the audience as sufficiently simultaneous with the psychic's announcement to impress. About five minutes is certainly safe, especially since he can keep talking to each caller for a few minutes before the next call ceases to seem roughly simultaneous. There are about 100,000 five-minute periods in a year. The probability that any given watch, say mine, will stop in a designated five-minute period is about 1 in 100,000. Low odds, but there are 10 million people watching the show. If only half of them are wearing watches, we could expect about 25 of those watches to stop in any given minute. If only a quarter of these ring in to the studio, that is 6 calls, more than enough to dumbfound a naïve audience. Especially when you add in the calls from people whose watches stopped the day before, people whose watches didn't stop but whose grandfather clocks did, people who died of heart attacks and their bereaved relatives phoned in to say that their 'ticker' gave out, and so on.


  • 0

#5 infinity

infinity

    Another day in paradise!

  • umbiciles
  • 2038 posts
  • Interests:oneness

Posted 05 June 2009 - 02:54 AM

both OMG



edit: to happyphantom, you can't use those extreme cases of obvious intuition-bashing and then apply that to everything else.
  • 0

#6 apeiro

apeiro
  • umbiciles
  • 8425 posts

Posted 05 June 2009 - 02:55 AM

In occasions of reasoning truth in the universe; logic.

In occasions of art, beauty, and emotion; intuition.
  • 0

#7 Remedy Malahide

Remedy Malahide

    Do not punish yourself; you deprive the world of its purpose.

  • umbiciles
  • 11429 posts
  • From:Brontë country
  • Nemesis:hippies

Posted 05 June 2009 - 03:04 AM


both OMG



edit: to happyphantom, you can't use those extreme cases of obvious intuition-bashing and then apply that to everything else.


I used an extreme example because you keep saying meaningless things like 'you know it when you know it'. Perhaps that's how the jury felt when they convicted Sally Clark. I was just trying to demonstrate why this is more than just being about personal hunches and 'spirituality' and that it does actually affect people. The homeopathy-to-treat-AIDS thing is another example, people rely on anecdotes rather than evidence and then they end up in trouble.

Of course there are times when you have to rely on intuition, there isn't always time to think about things perfectly rationally and I've lost count of the number of times I've gone back and checked I've locked my front door when I'm heading out even though I've known, logically, that I must have locked it because I've already checked it three times (if anyone diagnoses me with OCD then I will hunt you down and drop a spider full of eggs in your mouth while you're sleeping). But it matters and I want you to realise that I'm not just trying to be stubborn to wind you up.
  • 0

#8 ron

ron

    ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( ͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜

  • otter madness
  • 13629 posts

Posted 05 June 2009 - 03:07 AM

meditation, fasting, self-honesty and a pure diet are very good ways to help develop intuition and self-realize


Also, intuition is exactly the opposite of thinking, its not something "you" think of, it comes to you


im struggling to understand your definition of intuition

could you give an example of a time when you have had an intuition?
  • 0

#9 Remedy Malahide

Remedy Malahide

    Do not punish yourself; you deprive the world of its purpose.

  • umbiciles
  • 11429 posts
  • From:Brontë country
  • Nemesis:hippies

Posted 05 June 2009 - 03:08 AM

p.s. thread title is sexist
  • 0

#10 Guest_Nrsimhadeva_*

Guest_Nrsimhadeva_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 June 2009 - 03:11 AM

It's the title of a lost episode, bear with it.
  • 0

#11 Remedy Malahide

Remedy Malahide

    Do not punish yourself; you deprive the world of its purpose.

  • umbiciles
  • 11429 posts
  • From:Brontë country
  • Nemesis:hippies

Posted 05 June 2009 - 03:14 AM

It's the title of a lost episode, bear with it.



well then lost is sexist

rah rah rah
  • 0

#12 Pyramid Head

Pyramid Head
  • umbiciles
  • 1561 posts

Posted 05 June 2009 - 03:16 AM

nic, i know you think of me as just a blind 'follower' of science
but just because im an atheist and im a big fan of carl sagan doesnt mean i dont have a 'spiritual' side, for lack of a better expression.

art is my hobby. i like to write, paint, draw, sing. anything that helps me express the intense emotions i feel all the time. you might like this..
http://www.purevolum.../thebluespirals
  • 0

#13 infinity

infinity

    Another day in paradise!

  • umbiciles
  • 2038 posts
  • Interests:oneness

Posted 05 June 2009 - 03:18 AM


meditation, fasting, self-honesty and a pure diet are very good ways to help develop intuition and self-realize


Also, intuition is exactly the opposite of thinking, its not something "you" think of, it comes to you


im struggling to understand your definition of intuition

could you give an example of a time when you have had an intuition?

I am not completely sure of the textbook definition, but I know a recent case where my friend was in the car with an acquaintance and he just suddenly had the urge to tell him "you must go home and take care of your mother, she will be okay" and he had no way of knowing any of it ie no one said it to him.


edit:I tend to agree a lot with what Carl Jung has popularized
  • 0

#14 Remedy Malahide

Remedy Malahide

    Do not punish yourself; you deprive the world of its purpose.

  • umbiciles
  • 11429 posts
  • From:Brontë country
  • Nemesis:hippies

Posted 05 June 2009 - 03:20 AM

nic, i know you think of me as just a blind 'follower' of science
but just because im an atheist and im a big fan of carl sagan doesnt mean i dont have a 'spiritual' side, for lack of a better expression.

art is my hobby. i like to write, paint, draw, sing. anything that helps me express the intense emotions i feel all the time. you might like this..
http://www.purevolum.../thebluespirals


hell yeah i play the piano and it's one of my favourite things. and i have a degree in english literature so i am probably the least qualified person to talk about science and logic but whatever they're not mutually exclusive

ok shutting up now bye for now
  • 0

#15 ron

ron

    ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( ͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜͜

  • otter madness
  • 13629 posts

Posted 05 June 2009 - 03:22 AM



meditation, fasting, self-honesty and a pure diet are very good ways to help develop intuition and self-realize


Also, intuition is exactly the opposite of thinking, its not something "you" think of, it comes to you


im struggling to understand your definition of intuition

could you give an example of a time when you have had an intuition?

I am not completely sure of the textbook definition, but I know a recent case where my friend was in the car with an acquaintance and he just suddenly had the urge to tell him "you must go home and take care of your mother, she will be okay" and he had no way of knowing any of it ie no one said it to him.


edit:I tend to agree a lot with what Carl Jung has popularized


i think you forgot to finish your anecdote
  • 0

#16 infinity

infinity

    Another day in paradise!

  • umbiciles
  • 2038 posts
  • Interests:oneness

Posted 05 June 2009 - 03:25 AM

Ohhh yeah well it turned out that the kid was going to go home very soon to take care of his mom who was in fact, sick.


But besides that, for me its just little every day things like being able to instantly understand most peoples intentions behind their actions/words. Im also beginnning to develop sensing people's presences/mindstates. I'm sure you guys have the same thing as well.
  • 0

#17 Remedy Malahide

Remedy Malahide

    Do not punish yourself; you deprive the world of its purpose.

  • umbiciles
  • 11429 posts
  • From:Brontë country
  • Nemesis:hippies

Posted 05 June 2009 - 03:40 AM

Ohhh yeah well it turned out that the kid was going to go home very soon to take care of his mom who was in fact, sick.


But besides that, for me its just little every day things like being able to instantly understand most peoples intentions behind their actions/words. Im also beginnning to develop sensing people's presences/mindstates. I'm sure you guys have the same thing as well.


So you basically mean that you're a good judge of character and not an insensitive fuck? Well done you.
  • 0

#18 infinity

infinity

    Another day in paradise!

  • umbiciles
  • 2038 posts
  • Interests:oneness

Posted 05 June 2009 - 03:43 AM

Good judge of character - well-developed intuition, mirite?


ps negativity towards others reciprocates within yourself first
  • 0

#19 Remedy Malahide

Remedy Malahide

    Do not punish yourself; you deprive the world of its purpose.

  • umbiciles
  • 11429 posts
  • From:Brontë country
  • Nemesis:hippies

Posted 05 June 2009 - 03:48 AM

Good judge of character - well-developed intuition, mirite?


ps negativity towards others reciprocates within yourself first


Sure, I don't see why not. But I don't see how that has anything to do with statements like 'I don't believe that coincidences are coincidences'.

ps that sentence makes no sense
  • 0

#20 Animalitia

Animalitia
  • umbiciles
  • 337 posts

Posted 05 June 2009 - 04:46 AM

Intuition has its place in everyday life: ie, people who are able to judge character or situations based on gut feelings. My friend Torie is able to predict the weather accurately, my girlfriend is a fairly good judge of character upon initially meeting a person.

Logic has its place in making broad generalizations regarding the world. As anecdotal evidence, I'm usually able to predict road trip times down to a fifteen minute window, based on logical calculations of road length, road conditions and seasonal road work.

Logic has its place in finding answers to questions, using pathways of logical information and reasonable connections. How do you get a truck unstuck from under a bridge? Let some air out of the tires.

Intuition has its place in creating answers that might not be reasonable or logical, but which may be correct nonetheless. How do you cure influenza? With mold.
  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users