tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-344810805089119836.post4634952995822746824..comments2023-11-03T00:49:27.673-07:00Comments on Ssnot!: The Monty Hall Riddle and AtheismTatarizehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06655536699564744308noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-344810805089119836.post-20944953258421309252009-08-24T15:38:00.835-07:002009-08-24T15:38:00.835-07:00What I've just posted (at August 24, 2009 3:22...What I've just posted (at August 24, 2009 3:22:00 PM PDT) is wrong, on further thought, and the correct approach is indeed to always switch door. A second random pick does increase your chances to 50%, however an automatic switch increases them further to 67% based on the fact that your first pick puts the odds of having the wrong door at that number, hence you want to switch to the other side given the chance. The first door to be opened isn't picked at random after all, so it doesn't affect initial probabilities. So... my bad. :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-344810805089119836.post-55639438383438227212009-08-24T15:22:57.152-07:002009-08-24T15:22:57.152-07:00The Monty Hall "solution" is incorrectly...The Monty Hall "solution" is incorrectly stated. You are not supposed to automatically switch door after the first one has been open, you are supposed to randomly select one of the remaining two. This is quite different. In the first case there is no chance that you keep the door you initially picked but in the second case you have a chance out of two of keeping the same door and a chance out of two of changing door. This is what gives you 50% chance of winning: the fact that your first pick is irrelevant. A deterministic rule to either always keep the same door or to always change door retains your initial 33% chance.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-344810805089119836.post-69738914403846066582008-04-08T00:20:00.000-07:002008-04-08T00:20:00.000-07:00Absolutely brilliant. I just wrote a post on Monty...Absolutely brilliant. I just wrote <A HREF="http://anadder.com/an-intuitive-monty-hall" REL="nofollow">a post</A> on Monty Hall where I propose 1000 doors and 998 being opened as a way of making the solution intuitive. I knew others would have thought of the same thing but had no idea someone would connect it to Atheism so well! Well done.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-344810805089119836.post-61979457275812886852008-02-09T05:27:00.000-08:002008-02-09T05:27:00.000-08:00327 your comments are well taken. Though, I still ...327 your comments are well taken. Though, I still believe there is something to be taken away from the example. Often when a religionists disregards other religions they take that as a reason to conclude that accordingly their religion is more likely to be true. However the "odds" so to speak do not change for their religion.Tatarizehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06655536699564744308noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-344810805089119836.post-973620383257810992008-02-05T23:14:00.000-08:002008-02-05T23:14:00.000-08:00Access Curmudgeon, you simply cannot add such a mi...Access Curmudgeon, you simply cannot add such a middle step, because you cannot "open a door". In the original problem, monty opens a door to reveal that there is no prize behind it. In this version, how could you possibly "open a door" that proves whether or not a given religion is real? The only way to do that is to die, and you can only do that once.<BR/><BR/>For that matter, the whole monty hall problem relies on the fact that monty knows which door holds the prize. In his analysis, tatarize simply assumes the role of monty, and declares that the prize is behind the atheism door. He then uses the general monty hall solution to say "bingo, atheism is right!" But it is only right because he put the prize behind the atheism door in the first place.<BR/><BR/>Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that atheism isn't valid. I'm just saying that tatarize's use of the monty hall problem to support atheism is logically flawed. It relies on too many assumptions that shouldn't me made. Namely:<BR/><BR/>1) Atheism is right<BR/>2) Every religion is mutually exclusive<BR/>3) Theists are more likely to accept atheism than a different religionAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-344810805089119836.post-13036749653927302322008-02-05T17:13:00.000-08:002008-02-05T17:13:00.000-08:00I think the allegory is brilliant! No, it won’t c...I think the allegory is brilliant! No, it won’t clear the scales from the eyes of any theists, but no single argument has that power. It is inventive enough to give people pause, and that is all you could reasonably hope for!<BR/><BR/>Please add a middle step, where you expand upon the Monty Hall problem with 1000 doors and your host opens 998 of them after your first pick. That makes it intuitively obvious why switching is the better strategy, and it bridges nicely into your point about the thousand religions. Most people choose one door only by accident of birth, and adulthood reveals that “the prize” is not behind nearly all of the others…Access Curmudgeonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14936156913494320073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-344810805089119836.post-17589612764346423642008-02-05T03:32:00.000-08:002008-02-05T03:32:00.000-08:00Love it.Reminds me of the hell scene in South Park...Love it.<BR/><BR/>Reminds me of the hell scene in South Park when religious types are stunned to find themselves not in heaven and are told (in a game show host voice) "oh sorry, the correct answer was 'Mormon' yes, 'Mormon'"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-344810805089119836.post-39685849346284948432008-02-04T13:02:00.000-08:002008-02-04T13:02:00.000-08:00I disagree with this analysis. Here are some prob...I disagree with this analysis. Here are some problems.<BR/><BR/>1) It is begging the question--it assumes that the atheism door does not close like all the other doors do.<BR/><BR/>2) It assumes that the a priori probability of all the different doors is equal. If you've picked one from the start, chances are that you think it's much, much more likely than all the others.<BR/><BR/>3) In the Monty Hall problem, the reason the door you picked remains at 1/3 is because Monty has a zero probability of revealing your first choice to be wrong. This is not the case with religions. People have a nonzero probability of deciding that their own religion is incorrect. The Monty Hall analogy only works to the extent that people do not question their own religion. Well, arguably, most people <I>don't</I> question their own religion...millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05990852054891771988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-344810805089119836.post-4096412938720081992008-02-03T18:22:00.000-08:002008-02-03T18:22:00.000-08:00I love the monty hall problem, and I'm an atheist,...I love the monty hall problem, and I'm an atheist, but I don't think you can mish-mash the two together to form a convincing argument against theism.<BR/><BR/>"You can see the logical and obvious wrongness of many of these remaining doors. You are able to view them with a skeptical eye and reject them for being as absurd"<BR/><BR/>I don't think that is a valid assumption to make, especially from the theist's point of view. A theist thinks that the universe was created by a god. This means they are much more likely to sympathise with the other religions rather than atheism. Put simply, it would be much easier to convince them that they had picked the wrong god, rather than convincing them that no god exists. That requires a fundamental shift in thinking.<BR/><BR/>"and the odds of atheism is now 999/1000"<BR/><BR/>From a purely mathematical standpoint, there is no difference between the door labelled "atheism" and the other doors. The only reason you are able to discount the other 998 is due to the assumption I mentioned earlier.<BR/><BR/>"If you realize the real reason why you reject other people's religions, you will realize the reason I reject yours."<BR/><BR/>I doubt your reasons for rejecting theism are the same as a theist's reasons for rejecting other religions. You reject religion because there is no evidence in favour of it. They usually reject other religions simply because they are not the belief system they were brought up in.<BR/><BR/>Also, don't forget that there are people who <EM>don't</EM> reject other religions. There are people who believe in a creator, but who don't necessarily subscribe to a specific doctrine. Some believe that all religions are just different manifestations of the same deity.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com