Eyewitness Misidentification Universal Consciousness

“Damien, most myths have a core of truth. I’ve taken psychedelics and communicated with the universal consciousness. I might have thought it was just all in my head, except I learned things I hadn’t known before.” – Challenger   My response, “there is always people that believe they communicated with something other worldly and all of them when tested fail to prove anything but that they believe. We humans are reliably prone to memory errors, even to the point of changing what we remember and still having full belief in this reconstruction of experience or events as accurate when they are not even close. The Innocence Project, who work to overturn cases of wrongful conviction in the United States, report that eyewitness misidentification plays a role in about 75% of wrongful convictions overturned through DNA testing in the United States.”   Eyewitness...

So you are religious?

You need to believe not have justification supported by facts to believe and you should read facts then see if you still believe without evidence.   You likely never choose to believe because the evidence convinced you or even reserve belief until after reading the entire holy book of the religion you now claim.   No, you most likely are similar to me and many others rased in religion and thus where told by someone you trusted, “we believe this or that”. Then we say okay and believed like we where told without any evidence, no we believed just as we where told in claim after baceless claim.   Don’t get me wrong I was no better. I lived my life doing the same thing you are by believing the unbelievable and only demanding evidence we likely will reject if it goes against our beloved unbelievable, yet challenge everyone else who has a different unbelievable claim if it’s a different religion.   I myself did finally read the bible two different versions as an adult and still it took schooling on religion and the bible to finally see it for the lie it is and how I only started believing as I was told to and indoctrinated to believe.   Seek truth and stop supporting the lies of...

Justifying Judgments: Possibility and Epistemic Utility theory

Justifying Judgments: Possibility and Epistemic Utility theory The Rationalist Desire for Epistemically Credible Thinking   As a rationalist when I debate or challenge a position or thinking I want the epistemically provable truth, as I am not only closed to my own ideas, rather, I am just as will to adapt my position if given strong warrant or justification supported by valid and reliable reason and evidence with epistemic credibility. “Incorporating a prediction into future planning and decision making is advisable only if we have judged the prediction’s credibility. This is notoriously difficult and controversial in the case of predictions of future climate. By reviewing epistemic arguments about climate model performance, we discuss how to make and justify judgments about the credibility of climate predictions. Possibly proposing arguments that justify basing some judgments on the past performance of possibly dissimilar prediction problems. This encourages a more explicit use of data in making quantitative judgments about the credibility of future climate predictions, and in training users of climate predictions to become better judges of value, goodness, credibility, accuracy, worth or usefulness.” Ref Normative Theories of Rational Choice: Expected Utility  Rational Choice in a Normative Theory of Expected Utility = Utility (the axiology: value, goodness, credibility, accuracy, worth or usefulness) Theory. “a theory of how people should rationally make decisions”   According to Rachael Briggs at The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the expected utility of an act is a weighted average of the utilities of each of its possible outcomes, where the utility of an outcome measures the extent to which that outcome is preferred, or preferable, to the alternatives. The...