Talk:Self-referencing doomsday argument rebuttal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | ||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale. | ||||||||
|
|||||||||
[edit] List of doomsday scenarios
Could use votes to save this article, thanks MapleTree 22:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Miscategorized
How this article was ever classified as a mathematics article is beyond my ken. So I'm stripping the "Probability theory" category tag out. I've read this article, and the associated Doomsday argument article, and neither of them really has anything to do with "probability" in a mathematical sense, because there is no empirical basis for the proposition "I'm among the first x% of humans who will ever be born". That is wild speculation, and not the basis for any kind of mathematical argument. One might as well ask "What are the odds of winning a card game that has not yet been invented and will never be described?", or "What is the probability of rolling 17 with an unknown number of dice, which may or may not have marks on their faces?" DavidCBryant 23:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
