>I do think it is past time to return to
>the topic of the list.
I am quite happy to drop this topic. But first, I'd like to do a brief
recap of what out of all this is, in my view, UAI-relevant.
1. This discussion has verified that it is meaningful to many people to
assign probabilities to propositions concerning the existence and
attributes of God.
2. There is wide variation in the listserv population about what "God
exists" means and what are the directions and magnitudes of the likelihood
ratios for various kinds of evidence. Nevertheless, people do seem to have
ideas on the subject that are at least as amenable to modeling as are the
ideas of subject matter experts on modeling problems our community does not
hesitate to tackle.
3. Therefore, I conclude that it is possible to engage in scienfifically
meaninful discourse about what kinds of evidence would lead one to conclude
that God does or does not exist, and if God exists, what God is like.
While there are disconnects, we do seem to be able to understand each other
to a reasonable degree. If we kept this up we might come up with several
candidate models and evaluate the evidence for them. However, the UAI
listserv is hardly the place for this activity. Moreover, if I were going
to participate in such an activity, I would demand to include one or more
top-notch theologians.
4. The reason I told my personal story was to get reaction on the idea of
framing the "leap of faith" as a decision problem. I thought presenting a
concrete example would be a useful way to frame the discussion. While not
everyone would make the same decision I did (and that's fine with me --
vive la difference!) I don't think my choice could be shot down as
irrational. While it obviously has great emotional import to me, I find it
also a fascinating intellectual problem, and I enjoyed reading the
different perspectives people have.
5. I am somewhat disconcerted that some people on this list seem to think
they know the "correct" probabilities, and that being a scientist somehow
demands that one assign near-zero probability to the existence of God. But
I guess not everyone is a subjectivist, and as a subjectivist I'll grant
these people the right to their opinion. Nevertheless, we disagree
strongly.
Thanks everyone, for a fun discussion!
Kathy
