QFT

"How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg." - Abraham Lincoln

Morning Scepticism: Problem Of Indifference

The problem of evil is a devastating argument against God - taken by many as an argument for atheism, and taken seriously by believers. The concept of natural evil is particularly hard to shake off, and for good reason too. While it's debatable that free will can explain what agents do to each other, how does one explain the devastation of an earthquake? Yet an earthquake is not inherently evil in itself, it's a consequence of living on the planet we do. And this is where I think there's a problem of indifference rather than one of evil.

The universe does what it does irrespective to the desires of humanity. while people can attribute floods to God's wrath or ponder the ultimate greater good that comes from such an event, the notion that the flood is just a flood is far more devastating emotionally. There's nothing to reconcile because there's nothing there. We could be wiped out tomorrow by an asteroid and the universe would continue without us. Natural evil might pose an apparent contradiction, but at least there's something there to be seemingly contradictory.

Morning Scepticism: Life

Let's, for the sake of argument, assume that life can only exist in a narrow band on physical constants. And let's, for the sake of argument, assume that those constants are incredibly improbable. And let's, for the sake of argument, find ourselves in a world where life exists. Now for the important question. What's so significant about life?

Morning Scepticism: Labelling

To define positions or beliefs by labels is a useful shorthand for conveying information quickly, generally speaking. But when it comes to discussing relative merits of those positions or beliefs, labels start to become problematic. The danger becomes arguing against the perceived connotations or weaknesses of the label, rather than discussing the relative merits of the arguments. It's then about what people identify with, rather than stressing the importance on what the position is and how it's justified. Because when using the label, it's arguing to a meaning held in one's own head - minimising the significance of the arguments that don't conform to that label.

Morning Scepticism: Anecdotal

There are so many problems that come from the subjective nature of anecdotes that it really should be obvious that they aren't data. Take astrology, for example. That there are people born around the same time as you who might have a similar personal is not evidence that astrology works at all. At best it's going to be an amusing coincidence. But beyond that, how can anyone possibly see it as fitting a pattern? It's trying to find a pattern with only tiny pieces of data, data that is gathered and recalled subjectively, prone to all the problems that come with being human.

It's nice to hear that two similar people have found each other, but to think that it could possibly mean that there's a link between us and the constellations? Be serious!