Causality, Randomness and Induction

It is sometimes argued that causality is an illusion and that all events are actually random.

ACB wrote:

It is sometimes argued that causality is an illusion and that all events are actually random.

Perhaps it does not matter to the rest of what you say, but I would be interested if you could name someone who has ever argued such a thing.

kennethamy wrote:

ACB wrote:

It is sometimes argued that causality is an illusion and that all events are actually random.

Perhaps it does not matter to the rest of what you say, but I would be interested if you could name someone who has ever argued such a thing.

Night Ripper, e.g. on 6 July in the "Defense of Freewill against Determinism" thread. Stones rolling downhill and all that.

1. You said "If inductive decision-making is no better and no worse than non-inductive decision-making..." but we don't know that is the case. It might actually be better if past regularities continue into the future, random universe or not.

2. If I flip a coin 1,000 times, the string of flips that is HHHHHHHH.... and so on, all heads, is equally as likely as HHHHTTHTTHHHTTHHTHHHTTH... and so on. Both particular strings have equal probability of happening. Therefore, in a random universe, the universe where your watch hand continues on as expected is as equally probable as any other PARTICULAR sequence.

3. I don't think regularities will cease because I don't think I'm special. For regularities to cease to exist would mean that billions of years of regularities would have occurred up until now when they suddenly cease to exist. Obviously, since the universe is random, it could happen but why now instead of during the other eons of years?

Obviously, since the universe is random,

1. You said "If inductive decision-making is no better and no worse than non-inductive decision-making..." but we don't know that is the case. It might actually be better if past regularities continue into the future, random universe or not.

2. If I flip a coin 1,000 times, the string of flips that is HHHHHHHH.... and so on, all heads, is equally as likely as HHHHTTHTTHHHTTHHTHHHTTH... and so on. Both particular strings have equal probability of happening. Therefore, in a random universe, the universe where your watch hand continues on as expected is as equally probable as any other PARTICULAR sequence.

3. I don't think regularities will cease because I don't think I'm special. For regularities to cease to exist would mean that billions of years of regularities would have occurred up until now when they suddenly cease to exist. Obviously, since the universe is random, it could happen but why now instead of during the other eons of years?

But statistically, the chance of past regularities continuing into the future is vanishingly small, when you consider the unimaginably vast number of possible permutations of non-regularity.

Agreed. I made exactly this point in my OP. But suppose you had to choose not between "all heads" and a particular alternative sequence, but between "all heads" and any (unspecified) alternative sequence. That is to say, between "all heads" and "not all heads". Clearly, "not all heads" is vastly more likely.

But if you believe that events are random, you must conclude that all past regularities have occurred by pure chance - a coincidence of mind-boggling size. Well, you may say, it's possible. And so it is. But here's the point: the continuation of such regularities well into the future would be an even greater coincidence, so how can it be rational to believe that will happen?

Let's go back to the coin-flip example. If you have thrown 100 consecutive heads with a fair coin, what is the probability that the next 10 flips will all be heads? About one in a thousand. And for 20 consecutive heads, about one in a million. Why would the coin's past behaviour be any guide to its future behaviour if it falls randomly? From the fact that its past behaviour gave the illusion of being ordered, it does not follow that its future behaviour will likewise give the illusion of being ordered. Statistically, it will almost certainly not.

So if you think that events are truly random, you ought to believe that past regularities will almost certainly cease right now! But, of course, nobody really believes that they will. Everyone (yourself included) believes that there is good reason to think the regularities will continue into the foreseeable future. Therefore, they must believe that there is some factor that has overcome, and will continue to overcome, the unfavourable statistics. Whatever that factor may be (call it "the laws of nature" or something else) it follows that events in the universe are not random. QED.

The fact that you are picking out a string, say X and then comparing it to not-X ignores the fact that you can do the same for EVERY possible string, Y, Z. If you add them all up you will see that any particular string is extremely rare when you are looking for it. If you pick HTTTHTHHTHT... vs. not-HTTTHTHHTHT... the same argument holds.

ACB wrote:

But if you believe that events are random, you must conclude that all past regularities have occurred by pure chance - a coincidence of mind-boggling size. Well, you may say, it's possible. And so it is. But here's the point: the continuation of such regularities well into the future would be an even greater coincidence, so how can it be rational to believe that will happen?

Wrong. Put all possible universes into a hat and pick one at random. You have the same probability of picking the universe that has regularities that continue forever vs. the universe that has regularities that continue until next Thursday.

Put all possible universes into a hat and pick one at random. You have the same probability of picking the universe that has regularities that continue forever vs. the universe that has regularities that continue until next Thursday.

Night Ripper wrote:

Put all possible universes into a hat and pick one at random. You have the same probability of picking the universe that has regularities that continue forever vs. the universe that has regularities that continue until next Thursday.

OK, let's make 2050 the cut-off point. The permutations of possible universes that stay regular only until next Thursday, and then become chaotic, are still far greater in number than the permutations that stay regular until 2050. The former set can have the values HTHHTTHTHH..., HTTTTHTHHH..., THHTHTHTTT..., TTHTTHTHTH... etc between next Thursday and 2050, but the latter set is restricted to all-H between those two dates. So I have a much greater chance of picking a universe in which the regularities stop next Thursday.

All heads is not the only regularity. There are alternating heads and tails. All tails. Alternating double heads and tails, etc.

Also, I need to see some math before I can commit to even saying you have a good point because right now it's not very well formed.

If I have thrown all heads so far, I can throw either H or T next time, so my chance of throwing H is 1/2. My next two throws from now can be HH, HT, TH, or TT, so my chance of HH is 1/4. For HHH it will be 1/8, for HHHH 1/16, and so on. For 10 straight H's it will be 1/1024, and for 20 straight H's it will be 1/1,048,576. Out of 1,048,576 possible permutations of 20 flips, one has the simplest kind of regularity, some have more complex regularities, but most have no regularity at all.

The odds of getting H on the very next toss is always 1/2.

If past regularities corresponded to the regular sequence HHHTTTHHHTTT..., then the continuation of that sequence (and no other) would correspond to "(past) regularities continue". An example would be three consecutive dry months always alternating with three consecutive wet months. In this case any other regular sequence, such as HHHHHHHHHHHH... or HTHTHTHTHT... or HHTHHTHHTHHT..., or any irregular sequence, would represent "(past) regularities do not continue".

The possibility of picking a universe with one of the many possible other future regularities is much higher than that of picking a universe with a continuation of the unique past regularity. The possibility of picking a universe with no future regularity is vastly higher still.

It makes no sense to say that since all the prior configurations have been all true that somehow the grid owes you a false. That's the gambler's fallacy.