Talk:Appeal to probability/Archives/2015

Binary logic?

ok someone explain this to me: say there is a 99.999% probability that something is true, is this not 'close enough'? Isnt this a logical fallacy only for binary logic? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]).

Let's say that the probability of a person living through the day is 99.999%. That would mean that out of 6 billion people on Earth, 60,000 probably will not live through the day. If I were to say, "There's a 99.999% probability that you will live through the day; therefore, you will live through the day," 60,000 people could prove me wrong. The statement is fallacious. Even if the person I'm talking to does live through the day, it's still fallacious because I am asserting more than just that part of the statement. "this 'therefore' that" can be fallacious, even if "this" and "that" are true on their own. If I just chop off the flawed reasoning and make the prediction, I would have a 99.999% chance of being correct. Pretty decent odds.

The person might argue and say, "No, there's only a high probability that I will live. With those odds, someone is going to die today and it could be me," and I could respond with, "That's an appeal to probability, as well. It's very likely that someone will die today, but it's not guaranteed."  :) Maghnus 11:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Wouldn't you say, rather, that there is a 0.001% chance of someone dying? Nonagonal Spider (talk) 17:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The article says "it assumes that because something could happen, it is inevitable that it will happen." 99.9999999% however many 9's is not close enough. Only 100% is adequate to give something a 100% chance of happening. As for being a logical fallacy for only binary logic I am not sure.So I probably didn't help very much..sorry--Tooiha 12:20, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

As long as there's also a possibility that it will not happen - in your case, .001% - it's not a valid argument for drawing conclusions from (technically spoken). A better idea would be just to say that it's quite likely to happen. Erik 14:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

The argument that very probable events will happen is essentially the basis for statistical mechanics, a well established field of physics. For example, there is some probability that the oxygen in the room you're in will all go to one corner and you will suffocate, but the odds are so small (you would have to wait more than trillions of times the age of the universe to see it once) that we say oxygen will definitely diffuse evenly through a room. This is the basis for pressure, temperature, and all other thermodynamic properties. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]).

I have added a link to almost certainly. I hope that clears up the original question and the article. László 09:54, 18 July 2007 (UTC)