IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags michael shermer , numeracy , probability

Reply
Old 16th September 2008, 01:01 AM   #1
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 45,220
Post Michael Shermer: Why Our Brains Do Not Intuitively Grasp Probabilities

For your reading pleasure.

Quote:
Scientific American Magazine - September 3, 2008

Why Our Brains Do Not Intuitively Grasp Probabilities

Part one of a series of articles on the neuroscience of chance

By Michael Shermer

Have you ever gone to the phone to call a friend only to have your friend ring you first? What are the odds of that? Not high, to be sure, but the sum of all probabilities equals one. Given enough opportunities, outlier anomalies—even seeming miracles—will occasionally happen.

Let us define a miracle as an event with million-to-one odds of occurring (intuitively, that seems rare enough to earn the moniker). Let us also assign a number of one bit per second to the data that flow into our senses as we go about our day and assume that we are awake for 12 hours a day. We get 43,200 bits of data a day, or 1.296 million a month. Even assuming that 99.999 percent of these bits are totally meaningless (and so we filter them out or forget them entirely), that still leaves 1.3 “miracles” a month, or 15.5 miracles a year.

Thanks to our confirmation bias, in which we look for and find confirmatory evidence for what we already believe and ignore or discount contradictory evidence, we will remember only those few astonishing coincidences and forget the vast sea of meaningless data.

We can employ a similar back-of-the-envelope calculation to explain death premonition dreams.
[...]
Orphia Nay is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2008, 07:16 AM   #2
drkitten
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 21,629
Originally Posted by orphia nay View Post
For your reading pleasure.
I'd also recommend Kahnemann and Tversky and their parable of Linda, the (feminist?) bank teller.
drkitten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2008, 07:54 AM   #3
Bikewer
Penultimate Amazing
 
Bikewer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Louis, Mo.
Posts: 13,231
A well-stated summary of ideas I've tried to point out for years. (less well-stated....)
Bikewer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2008, 10:24 AM   #4
Rodney
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,942
Originally Posted by orphia nay View Post
For your reading pleasure.
So all coincidences and premonitions can be dismissed by "assign[ing] a number of one bit per second to the data that flow into our senses as we go about our day"?
Rodney is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2008, 10:38 AM   #5
Soapy Sam
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 28,766
7 bits/sec is the more common figure for mental activity. But how many bits are required to compose a miraculous message?
I'd say a meaningful one bit message would indeed be fairly improbable. Even "NO" comprises rather more than one bit.
Soapy Sam is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2008, 10:53 AM   #6
Dunstan
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,289
I don't have my copy handy, but I believe Richard Dawkins' book A Devil's Chaplain contained an essay along similar lines that I would also recommend.
Dunstan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:23 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.