What a great idea. I would be interested in seeing if any fellow Mormons will be attending?
I have been studying a lot of the work on Bayes by Tim McGrew and have been applying it to the claims of the Mormon church. With well adjusted priors the evidence seems pretty good! I recommend the influential work on Bayes done by Tim and Lydia McGrew.
As a non-Mormon Christian the application of Bayesian principles to religious claims, particularly claims made by ancient documents where the primary evidence is no longer available is of great interest to me. I hope I can make it. Work may have me traveling in late January though. :(
Me too. I second the idea of exploring how the McGrews apply Bayes to religious claims. Then we can contrast that with how someone like Richard Carrier uses them against religious claims. I think the difference in uses will be enlightening.
I recommend the influential work on Bayes done by Tim and Lydia McGrew.
Past Less Wrong discussion did not paint a favorable picture of their ‘Bayesian apologetics’: arbitrarily restricted sets of hypotheses, abuse of dubious infinite-strength independence assumptions, etc.
r_claypool provided some good links in that thread that addressed those issues. Additionally Lydia and Tim McGrew have penned a number of posts and papers dealing with the issues you raise.
I actually think that the topic could prove fruitful at a gathering in Salt Lake. Apply Bayesian principles and also discuss topics such as “belief in belief” and “fake explanations” prior to engaging the topic of Bayesian Mormon Apologetics.
What a great idea. I would be interested in seeing if any fellow Mormons will be attending? I have been studying a lot of the work on Bayes by Tim McGrew and have been applying it to the claims of the Mormon church. With well adjusted priors the evidence seems pretty good! I recommend the influential work on Bayes done by Tim and Lydia McGrew.
As a non-Mormon Christian the application of Bayesian principles to religious claims, particularly claims made by ancient documents where the primary evidence is no longer available is of great interest to me. I hope I can make it. Work may have me traveling in late January though. :(
Me too. I second the idea of exploring how the McGrews apply Bayes to religious claims. Then we can contrast that with how someone like Richard Carrier uses them against religious claims. I think the difference in uses will be enlightening.
Past Less Wrong discussion did not paint a favorable picture of their ‘Bayesian apologetics’: arbitrarily restricted sets of hypotheses, abuse of dubious infinite-strength independence assumptions, etc.
r_claypool provided some good links in that thread that addressed those issues. Additionally Lydia and Tim McGrew have penned a number of posts and papers dealing with the issues you raise.
I actually think that the topic could prove fruitful at a gathering in Salt Lake. Apply Bayesian principles and also discuss topics such as “belief in belief” and “fake explanations” prior to engaging the topic of Bayesian Mormon Apologetics.