Is genocide ok if God tells you to do it?

[TheKnight]

I was going to re-jig the scenario, but I suddenly realized it's not worth the bother. I don't think we're even operating with the same definitions for the key terms here. Personally, I don't see 51% sure as "certain". I don't think anyone else here does. By the language you're using, I don't think you mean the same thing I do when you say "certain".

Certain doesn't mean 100% to me. As I said earlier, to know=50%+ probability.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Certain doesn't mean 100% to me. As I said earlier, to know=50%+ probability.

But what it seems to me that you've been arguing is that 50%+ probability of being right is enough certainty to act in any situation. I disagree; I think that the level of certainty we need is situation-specific.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

But what it seems to me that you've been arguing is that 50%+ probability of being right is enough certainty to act in any situation. I disagree; I think that the level of certainty we need is situation-specific.

Yep - totally depends on what odds your being laid.

 

[Perfect Circle]

Certain doesn't mean 100% to me. As I said earlier, to know=50%+ probability.

So, you base your opinion of the Torah being true on the fact that the Jewish people have survived as long as they have.... Do you mean culturally? Or racially?

Either way, I'm confused. There are other cultures/races/groups/religions that have survived just as long. Why aren't their holy books just as true?

 

[TheKnight]

But what it seems to me that you've been arguing is that 50%+ probability of being right is enough certainty to act in any situation. I disagree; I think that the level of certainty we need is situation-specific.

Basically, my point is this:

If I have two options. And I need to decide which is the correct option. The option that has the higher probability is correct. If I must pick between A and B, and B has 51% while A has 49% of being the right choice, then I can be fairly confident that B is the correct choice.

Confidence in decisions doesn't mean 100% sure. I don't need to be 100% sure for my decisions, I just have to be confident that the decision is right.

So, you base your opinion of the Torah being true on the fact that the Jewish people have survived as long as they have.... Do you mean culturally? Or racially?

Either way, I'm confused. There are other cultures/races/groups/religions that have survived just as long. Why aren't their holy books just as true?

Because no other race/culture has been put under as much pressure as the Jews have, if they have it hasn't been as long as they have culturally, and no other religion has had the kind of impact on the world that Judaism has had.

The Jews continue to exist when everything indicates that they shouldn't.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Basically, my point is this:

If I have two options. And I need to decide which is the correct option. The option that has the higher probability is correct. If I must pick between A and B, and B has 51% while A has 49% of being the right choice, then I can be fairly confident that B is the correct choice.

Only if:

- the effort involved in choosing A and B is the same
- if you're right, the outcome is the same regardless of which one you choose
- if you're wrong, the outcome is the same regardless of which one you choose.

I know you can come up with any number of artificial hypotheticals where these conditions are satisfied, but in real-world decision-making, these things can't be taken as automatically true... and if they're not definitely true, then your reasoning falls apart.

Another hypothetical scenario:

You're sitting in the living room at a friend's house when a thought suddenly pops into your head: did you lock your keys in your car? You check your pockets - no keys. You think it over and decide there's about a 75% chance that they're still in the ignition and about a 25% chance that you dropped the key on the ground next to the car. You don't have a spare key with you.

Assuming you don't know how to jimmy the lock yourself and you don't want to break a window to get in, you have two options:

1. Go down to your car, look to confirm that the keys are in there. If they are, call a locksmith. If the key's on the ground, pick it up and all's good.
2. Call the locksmith right now without checking.

It takes about 2 minutes and a trip down and up a flight of stairs to go out to your car. If the locksmith makes the trip out, he'll charge you $100 for his trouble whether or not the keys are in the car.

What do you do? Option 1 or option 2? Remember: you're 75% certain that you'll need to call a locksmith eventually.

Is a 25% chance that you won't need to shell out $100 worth 2 minutes of effort (and potentially an extra 2 minutes of waiting for the locksmith) and a climb up the stairs?

 

[fantome profane]

Yes, I would have to vote guilty. A reasonable doubt means that the probability of their being not guilty is either 50% or more. If the probability is 51%, then there is no reasonable doubt.

If you ever do find yourself called for jury duty make sure the judge knows about your 50%+ standard of reasonable doubt. Saying this will get you out of jury duty real quick.

 

[Autodidact]

Basically, my point is this:

If I have two options. And I need to decide which is the correct option. The option that has the higher probability is correct. If I must pick between A and B, and B has 51% while A has 49% of being the right choice, then I can be fairly confident that B is the correct choice.

Confidence in decisions doesn't mean 100% sure. I don't need to be 100% sure for my decisions, I just have to be confident that the decision is right.



Because no other race/culture has been put under as much pressure as the Jews have, if they have it hasn't been as long as they have culturally, and no other religion has had the kind of impact on the world that Judaism has had.

The Jews continue to exist when everything indicates that they shouldn't.

First, you've contradicted yourself. You agreed with Katzpur that you needed to be "very sure" (or "darned sure" or "absolutely sure", I can't remember and can't find the post) which you have now retreated to >51% sure.

Second, you have not established at greater than 51% of confidence that:

God exists.
God is the Adonai, the God of the Jews.
That God gave the commandments described in the Tanakh.

Therefore, even by your own erroneous logic, you should never follow such a commandment.

 

[TheKnight]

Only if:

- the effort involved in choosing A and B is the same
- if you're right, the outcome is the same regardless of which one you choose
- if you're wrong, the outcome is the same regardless of which one you choose.

I know you can come up with any number of artificial hypotheticals where these conditions are satisfied, but in real-world decision-making, these things can't be taken as automatically true... and if they're not definitely true, then your reasoning falls apart.

Another hypothetical scenario:

You're sitting in the living room at a friend's house when a thought suddenly pops into your head: did you lock your keys in your car? You check your pockets - no keys. You think it over and decide there's about a 75% chance that they're still in the ignition and about a 25% chance that you dropped the key on the ground next to the car. You don't have a spare key with you.

Assuming you don't know how to jimmy the lock yourself and you don't want to break a window to get in, you have two options:

1. Go down to your car, look to confirm that the keys are in there. If they are, call a locksmith. If the key's on the ground, pick it up and all's good.
2. Call the locksmith right now without checking.

It takes about 2 minutes and a trip down and up a flight of stairs to go out to your car. If the locksmith makes the trip out, he'll charge you $100 for his trouble whether or not the keys are in the car.

What do you do? Option 1 or option 2? Remember: you're 75% certain that you'll need to call a locksmith eventually.

Is a 25% chance that you won't need to shell out $100 worth 2 minutes of effort (and potentially an extra 2 minutes of waiting for the locksmith) and a climb up the stairs?

See but that's an arbitrary decision. I mean, I probably wouldn't call a locksmith (because I know how to jimmy the lock). So I wouldn't call one in the first place. But if I didn't know how to jimmy a lock, It would still make more sense to go outside and look because ultimately I don't know where my keys are. I wouldn't even be able to assign a probability to either possibility because I don't really know. Any probability I assigned would be a guess.

If you ever do find yourself called for jury duty make sure the judge knows about your 50%+ standard of reasonable doubt. Saying this will get you out of jury duty real quick.

Eh, I have all sorts of ways to get out of it.

First, you've contradicted yourself. You agreed with Katzpur that you needed to be "very sure" (or "darned sure" or "absolutely sure", I can't remember and can't find the post) which you have now retreated to >51% sure.

Sure/Very Sure/Know=50%+ evidence of probability. I said that earlier.

Second, you have not established at greater than 51% of confidence that:

I haven't?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

See but that's an arbitrary decision. I mean, I probably wouldn't call a locksmith (because I know how to jimmy the lock). So I wouldn't call one in the first place.

Yes, but not in my hypothetical problem. Surely you can put yourself in the shoes of someone who doesn't have this particular skill.

But if I didn't know how to jimmy a lock, It would still make more sense to go outside and look because ultimately I don't know where my keys are. I wouldn't even be able to assign a probability to either possibility because I don't really know. Any probability I assigned would be a guess.

Again, it's a hypothetical, but to keep you happy, how about this: rather than coming up with specific numbers, you think to yourself this: "I'm pretty sure that the keys are still in the ignition, because I kept the radio running to hear the tail end of that song when I got here. Still, maybe I grabbed the keys and just forgot; if I did that, they're probably on the ground by the car since they're not in my pocket."

My point is this: despite not being exactly sure of the level of certainty involved in the assessment, you're quite confident that the chances that the keys are still in the ignition are higher than your 51%... probably much higher.

Does this make it easier for you to answer the question as presented?

 

[TheKnight]

Yes, but not in my hypothetical problem. Surely you can put yourself in the shoes of someone who doesn't have this particular skill.


Again, it's a hypothetical, but to keep you happy, how about this: rather than coming up with specific numbers, you think to yourself this: "I'm pretty sure that the keys are still in the ignition, because I kept the radio running to hear the tail end of that song when I got here. Still, maybe I grabbed the keys and just forgot; if I did that, they're probably on the ground by the car since they're not in my pocket."

My point is this: despite not being exactly sure of the level of certainty involved in the assessment, you're quite confident that the chances that the keys are still in the ignition are higher than your 51%... probably much higher.

Does this make it easier for you to answer the question as presented?

No because I don't think like that. Despite all the possible places the keys could be, if I didn't remember I would think "Hmm, I wonder where my keys are. They might be in the car, they might be outside. I guess I should go check."

There's not point making a decision on guessed probabilities when I can just go check and decide from there.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No because I don't think like that. Despite all the possible places the keys could be, if I didn't remember I would think "Hmm, I wonder where my keys are. They might be in the car, they might be outside. I guess I should go check."

There's not point making a decision on guessed probabilities when I can just go check and decide from there.

Even though in checking, you potentially (maybe even probably) waste time and effort? I thought you said that once you were 50%+ certain of something, you could be sure that was the right course of action.

 

[TheKnight]

Even though in checking, you potentially (maybe even probably) waste time and effort? I thought you said that once you were 50%+ certain of something, you could be sure that was the right course of action.

Yes. In this case I would not be 50%+ sure. I would only be guessing based off of what I vaguely remember. If anything, my knowledge of the whereabouts of my keys is 0% because I don't know. If I don't know something, guessing doesn't increase my probability. If I do guess, I shouldn't try and base my decision off of which guess has the probability of being right.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes. In this case I would not be 50%+ sure. I would only be guessing based off of what I vaguely remember. If anything, my knowledge of the whereabouts of my keys is 0% because I don't know.

You've got quite a bit of knowledge about where your keys might be: you drove to your friend's house, so you had them when you first arrived. You know where you've been in the house since you got there, so you only have a rather small range of possibilities for where they might be.

If I don't know something, guessing doesn't increase my probability. If I do guess, I shouldn't try and base my decision off of which guess has the probability of being right.

If you did know with certainty, then you wouldn't be assigning a probability to it at all. If you knew for sure what really happened, you wouldn't be 50% sure, you'd be 100% sure.

However, all this raises a relevant point: when it comes to a command from God, how would you decide that you're "50%+" sure? When confronted with a sign that may or may not be from God, how do you quantify your level of certainty?

 

[TheKnight]

However, all this raises a relevant point: when it comes to a command from God, how would you decide that you're "50%+" sure? When confronted with a sign that may or may not be from God, how do you quantify your level of certainty?

I don't believe in 100% sure. I'm too much a philosopher for that.

Well, for me, in order for it to even be 50% God would have to show me as much as He showed the Israelites. The commandments don't change. Only He could change them and so far as I know that's not happening anytime soon. Even if I had an inkling that God was telling me to do it, I'm always safer by not killing them, regardless of the probability.

 

[Autodidact]

How are you 50% + sure what God showed the Israelites, or that any of that happened?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I don't believe in 100% sure. I'm too much a philosopher for that.

Then in some respect, you're always guessing. The trick is just to make your guesses the best guesses you can make them.

Well, for me, in order for it to even be 50% God would have to show me as much as He showed the Israelites.

All of it? What if He showed you quite a bit but left out, say, the frogs, locusts, and the river of blood? You wouldn't do what He told you?

The commandments don't change. Only He could change them and so far as I know that's not happening anytime soon. Even if I had an inkling that God was telling me to do it, I'm always safer by not killing them, regardless of the probability.

Tell that to Onan.

But how do you figure out what percentage certain you are? How would you distinguish between being, say, 40% and 60% certain that it was God speaking to you? That's the difference between doing it and not doing it, right?

 

[Perfect Circle]

How are you 50% + sure what God showed the Israelites, or that any of that happened?

Exactly... If you're not 50%+ sure that you're keys are probably in your car even though that would be one of the most likely places for them to be in 9/10's scenario, then you how can you possibly be 50%+ sure that anything God showed the Israelites actually happened? You can't be sure that the tanakh is true following logic alone. You're going off of some personal intuition or feeling, which, as stated earlier in the thread, is notoriously unreliable.

 

[TheKnight]

How are you 50% + sure what God showed the Israelites, or that any of that happened?

Eh, much too much for this one thread.

Then in some respect, you're always guessing. The trick is just to make your guesses the best guesses you can make them.

Eh, in a way. The thing about the keys is that I don't have anything external to rely on other than my own internal thoughts. There are plenty of scenarios where you have external evidence to rely on.

All of it? What if He showed you quite a bit but left out, say, the frogs, locusts, and the river of blood? You wouldn't do what He told you?

He would have to do just as much if not more.

Tell that to Onan.

But how do you figure out what percentage certain you are? How would you distinguish between being, say, 40% and 60% certain that it was God speaking to you? That's the difference between doing it and not doing it, right?

Well, in this case, 40% would be Him not doing everything He did when He first said not to take lives. 60% would be Him doing more than what He did when He first said not to take lives.

Exactly... If you're not 50%+ sure that you're keys are probably in your car even though that would be one of the most likely places for them to be in 9/10's scenario, then you how can you possibly be 50%+ sure that anything God showed the Israelites actually happened? You can't be sure that the tanakh is true following logic alone. You're going off of some personal intuition or feeling, which, as stated earlier in the thread, is notoriously unreliable.

You can't be sure of anything based on logic alone (except math, math is God).

As I said earlier in this thread, I believe in the Torah because I believe in the Jews.

 

[Autodidact]

About your "existence of the Jews" argument, consider this scenario. Let's say I'm a scam artist. I get 10000 email addresses. I pick a stock. I send 5000 people my prediction that the stock will go up, 5000 my prediction the stock will go down, and invite all of them to buy my stock predicting service. The stock either goes up or down, and I send a second e-mail to the 5000 who got the right advice, along with the name of a second stock. I tell 2500 it will go up, and 2500 it will go down. The 2500 who got the right advice both times are intrigued, so I repeat the procedure, 1250/1250, and finally once more, 625/625. I now have 625 people who think I'm an amazing stock predictor,having picked right 4 times in a row. If I send them all one last email, guaranteeing my results, against splitting them into two groups, and inviting them to send me $1000 for my amazing, guaranteed, stock prediction newsletter, I think a significant number of them will do so.

Similarly, various groups and tribes die out eventually, but 1 will last longer than the others, just by random luck, and it does not show that the God of that group exists or is powerful. It's retro-diction, which is bogus.

And another thing, shouldn't g-d have delivered on more promises than mere existence? Shouldn't we be in a lot better shape, power and success-wise?