Mathematics & Theology

[Reptillian]

I was talking with a professor earlier today and he said that later in the semester we were going to look at applications of Game Theory. He said you can use it to argue that the existence of God is unlikely, but that the existence of free will and precognition are probable. I was wondering what you all thought about this. I've never run across Game Theory before, so I don't know enough to weigh in on the issue. I know there are some mathematically minded forum members, have you ever seen such applications of Game Theory?

How about it everyone:

Is it possible to use mathematical arguements to draw conclusions about God and its probable properties?

Do God, free will, or precognition exist and would be willing to believe in these sorts of things someone could argue in their favor with advanced mathematics?

 

[Quiddity]

Well, God is utterly simple and not made of parts so to talk about God in regards to properties (assuming you mean matter here) is a mistake IMO.

At the very least you could say Plato was onto something with his theory of forms.

 

[PolyHedral]

A mathematical argument requires that each of those things be defined rigiriously enough to be analysed with formal logic.

Be my guest if you want to try.

Well, God is utterly simple and not made of parts

Assuming that ths God is also the creator of the universe, that's the reverse of simple.

 

[Reptillian]

Well, God is utterly simple and not made of parts so to talk about God in regards to properties (assuming you mean matter here) is a mistake IMO.

At the very least you could say Plato was onto something with his theory of forms.

Not necessarily material parts or properties. For example the idea of the Trinity could be considered splitting God into parts... or personality properties of the Biblical God could be used in writing proofs.

 

[Quiddity]

Assuming that ths God is also the creator of the universe, that's the reverse of simple.

The fact that something complicated comes from something simple doesn't make it reverse. It just makes a simple entity with vast amounts of potentiality.

 

[Reptillian]

A mathematical argument requires that each of those things be defined rigiriously enough to be analysed with formal logic.

Be my guest if you want to try.

Thats what I thought too. I'm hoping he'll be willing to examine some of those arguements by the time we get to the Game Theory part of the course...I'm curious to see how the God he's looking at is defined.

 

[Quiddity]

Not necessarily material parts or properties. For example the idea of the Trinity could be considered splitting God into parts... or personality properties of the Biblical God could be used in writing proofs.

It will probably show logical possibilities in the same way that we can show that a 4th dimension is a subjective reality but it has no application in the real world.

 

[Reptillian]

It will probably show logical possibilities in the same way that we can show that a 4th dimension is a subjective reality but it has no application in the real world.

Hyperdimensional geometry has all sorts of practical applications. Relativity aside, any problem where you need to analyze something that depends on more than three variables is a good candidate for extradimensional geometric analysis.

 

[PolyHedral]

It will probably show logical possibilities in the same way that we can show that a 4th dimension is a subjective reality but it has no application in the real world.

Einstein disagrees with you, and his research underlies the GPS system and every particle accelerator in the world. A 4th dimension is very real; just not visible.

 

[Quiddity]

Einstein disagrees with you, and his research underlies the GPS system and every particle accelerator in the world. A 4th dimension is very real; just not visible.

Well then he must disagree with himself because we are saying the same thing. That's whay I meant by subjective reality.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

He said you can use it to argue that the existence of God is unlikely, but that the existence of free will and precognition are probable.

I can use the plots from episodes of the Smurfs to argue just about anything.

 

[Falvlun]

I didn't really know what game theory was, so I Wiki'd it. I'm still not very clear so, if anyone wants to chime in with their simplified (preferably non-mathematical mind) interpretation, that would be great.

From what I read, game theory is a mathematical way to predict the outcomes of games (which can essentially be a defined set of interactions between anything.)

As for how it can tell us things about god or other existential questions, based upon this:

The games studied in game theory are well-defined mathematical objects. A game consists of a set of players, a set of moves (or strategies) available to those players, and a specification of payoffs for each combination of strategies.

Game Theory

I don't think we can define the set of players or strategies involved in calculating the probability of God or free-will, let alone define them well enough for a mathematical formula to work upon. I would think the result would be as arbitrary as the numbers fed into it.

 

[PolyHedral]

Well then he must disagree with himself because we are saying the same thing. That's whay I meant by subjective reality.

Mathematics doesn't show you subjectivity. It only lets you infer.

 

[cablescavenger]

I was talking with a professor earlier today and he said that later in the semester we were going to look at applications of Game Theory. He said you can use it to argue that the existence of God is unlikely, but that the existence of free will and precognition are probable. I was wondering what you all thought about this. I've never run across Game Theory before, so I don't know enough to weigh in on the issue. I know there are some mathematically minded forum members, have you ever seen such applications of Game Theory?

How about it everyone:

Is it possible to use mathematical arguements to draw conclusions about God and its probable properties?

Do God, free will, or precognition exist and would be willing to believe in these sorts of things someone could argue in their favor with advanced mathematics?

I came across game theory a couple of times on my business degree. It is strategic theory.
Plea bargaining in the US is based on game theory, providing options to secure a conviction, the problem being that the innocent are also pushed into taking an option despite being innocent.

I have not heard it used to disprove God, so I don't know how that argument goes. It would be interesting to find out.

You can use probability to look at the likelihood of a God - Dawkins did that in the God delusion.

 

[Reptillian]

I didn't really know what game theory was, so I Wiki'd it. I'm still not very clear so, if anyone wants to chime in with their simplified (preferably non-mathematical mind) interpretation, that would be great.

From what I read, game theory is a mathematical way to predict the outcomes of games (which can essentially be a defined set of interactions between anything.)

As for how it can tell us things about god or other existential questions, based upon this:

Game Theory

I don't think we can define the set of players or strategies involved in calculating the probability of God or free-will, let alone define them well enough for a mathematical formula to work upon. I would think the result would be as arbitrary as the numbers fed into it.

I'm as confused as you about what the prof meant. The only thing I can think is that he must think of God as being a kind of game player with the universe and then looking at what we see in actuality to see if that God seems to be compatable with what we observe.

 

[cablescavenger]

I'm as confused as you about what the prof meant. The only thing I can think is that he must think of God as being a kind of game player with the universe and then looking at what we see in actuality to see if that God seems to be compatable with what we observe.

The only thing I can think is maybe he was referring to mans options to obey or not obey God (or some kind of mutual co-operation between man and God), and maybe the outcome is that man is better off without God.

I don't know, but do post it when you get the class

 

[Alex_G]

I was talking with a professor earlier today and he said that later in the semester we were going to look at applications of Game Theory. He said you can use it to argue that the existence of God is unlikely, but that the existence of free will and precognition are probable. I was wondering what you all thought about this. I've never run across Game Theory before, so I don't know enough to weigh in on the issue. I know there are some mathematically minded forum members, have you ever seen such applications of Game Theory?

How about it everyone:

Is it possible to use mathematical arguements to draw conclusions about God and its probable properties?

Do God, free will, or precognition exist and would be willing to believe in these sorts of things someone could argue in their favor with advanced mathematics?

In my understanding i dont really see how game theory could be directly used in the question of Gods existence. At best maybe emulating certain social situations and interactions you can provide rationales and predictions that are essentially Godless in their explanations. But thats about it.

In talking about free will, i think there is probably a fundamental problem.
That is, because the whole thing is set up to analyse interactions between people, who hold different information, goals and expectations, and work out what strategies might be beneficial or detrimental to different parties thus guiding choices. It has an inbuilt guarantee of 'free will' if what you define as free will is being the sort of being that these models are based off or work for. If being intelligent and aware, reactive to information and rational in action is free will, then game theory demonstrates it, but only because its built off those things to begin with. Its just descriptive. Wether true free will exists is different.

Its kind of like IQ intelligence scores predicting exam performance. The IQ test is emulating many features of exam questions anyway, and so has some inbuilt guarantee of correlating well. If you ask if IQ tests demonstrate intelligence, the answer is yes, if all you definition of intelligence is, is being good at those sorts of exams. But if your definition is more than that, well its not so clear. Such an example is how IQ score doesnt predict eminence in a field very well.

 

[Quiddity]

Mathematics doesn't show you subjectivity. It only lets you infer.

That was my mistake. Math is indeed objective.

 

[Reptillian]

The only thing I can think is maybe he was referring to mans options to obey or not obey God (or some kind of mutual co-operation between man and God), and maybe the outcome is that man is better off without God.

I don't know, but do post it when you get the class

I'm thinking he'll talk more about it in class later this semester. I'll be sure to post in a month or so when I find out more.

In my understanding i dont really see how game theory could be directly used in the question of Gods existence. At best maybe emulating certain social situations and interactions you can provide rationales and predictions that are essentially Godless in their explanations. But thats about it.

In talking about free will, i think there is probably a fundamental problem.
That is, because the whole thing is set up to analyse interactions between people, who hold different information, goals and expectations, and work out what strategies might be beneficial or detrimental to different parties thus guiding choices. It has an inbuilt guarantee of 'free will' if what you define as free will is being the sort of being that these models are based off or work for. If being intelligent and aware, reactive to information and rational in action is free will, then game theory demonstrates it, but only because its built off those things to begin with. Its just descriptive. Wether true free will exists is different.

Its kind of like IQ intelligence scores predicting exam performance. The IQ test is emulating many features of exam questions anyway, and so has some inbuilt guarantee of correlating well. If you ask if IQ tests demonstrate intelligence, the answer is yes, if all you definition of intelligence is, is being good at those sorts of exams. But if your definition is more than that, well its not so clear. Such an example is how IQ score doesnt predict eminence in a field very well.

I see what you're saying. I could also see how if a person does well on an IQ test in general it would make it more likely that they have intelligence...so IQ tests may not be a great way to measure or predict it, but it can be a possible qualitative indicator. So perhaps the demonstrations aren't airtight, but just saying that its likely freewill and precognition exist? IDK enough about game theory to say for sure. I'm looking forward to learning more later in the semester. I have two classes that we're covering it in, so by summer I should be well versed. I'm especially interested in the precognition one as that flies in the face of relativity.

Personally I suspect that the one dealing with the likely non existence of god is likely a negative mathematical analogue to St Anselm's ontological arguement...but time will tell.

 

[Reptillian]

I can use the plots from episodes of the Smurfs to argue just about anything.

Oh really... Can you argue that deep down Gargamel is a decent guy who actually loves Smurfs?