tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post113773573006811311..comments2023-10-29T10:32:36.914-04:00Comments on Philosophy, et cetera: Counterfactual CommitmentsRichard Y Chappellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1137972687490123582006-01-22T18:31:00.000-05:002006-01-22T18:31:00.000-05:00Well, I officially encourage you NOT to read my po...Well, I officially encourage you NOT to read my post. There is some idea there (maybe) but I think I have to agree with Richard that my past self didn't get the point right. Too much seems to turn on whether the sole grounds for judging the probability of R depends upon whether one accepts theism or not. If P's argument does turn on the assumption that the sole grounds for judging R to be high is the assumption of theism, the point I was trying to make cannot be right for pretty much the reasons Richard left in the comments. If P's argument doesn't turn on that assumption, it seems then his argument is pretty much a non-starter so whatever funny business I was trying to point to is hardly interesting.Clayton Littlejohnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05596200828134402805noreply@blogger.com