At 12:18 PM 1/17/2009, you wrote:
[Marsha}
> Rather than a causes b, a one-directional thing, a Buddhist might
> state that the relationship between a and b is mutually
> interdependent based on cause and conditions.
> Does probability always imply a one-direction relationship, or is the
> implied relationship mutually interdependent?
Suppose the odds of rolling a 1 on a die are 1/6. And the odds of
rolling a 1 on another die are 1/6. The odds of picking up the dice,
shaking them and rolling two 1s are 1/36 (= 1/6 x 1/6). That's
because the two rolls are "statistically independent" events, even though they
are not physically independent.
A Buddhist casino calculates odds the same way as Las Vegas.
Craig
Craig,
I appreciate you trying. I'm afraid most of my question was within
my head and vague. I was trying to see if there was any kind of
similarity between Krimel's 'probability' and the Buddhist 'mutually
interdependent based on cause and conditions' and RMP replacing
'cause' with 'prefers'. Krimel's elephant's ear, tail, and plains
muffin just wasn't helpful at all. But if I did not present my
question clearly, the onus is on me.
Thanks anyway.
Marsha
.
.
The Universe is uncaused, like a net of jewels in which each is a
reflection of all the others in a fantastic, interrelated harmony without end.
.
.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
