Question

Suppose a person comes up to you and says he can predict who will win the lottery for the next seven days. For the purposes of this example, let us suppose that cheating is impossible. Of course, in actuality, this can never be determined, but the point of my question is more about reasoning in general so let us assume that we could somehow know that he couldn’t have cheated through any physically known means.

Now, suppose he guesses who wins for the next seven days. He then claims that God, an All Powerful Being, guided him to do so. Let’s say the chance of him getting it right each time is 1 in 8 million. This results in a stupendously low number of probability of getting 7 straight lotteries correct.

Given that cheating is impossible, we are left with only three options: a) chance or b) his proposed god or c) some sort of other unknown natural or supernatural process.

Now, a) of course has a very low probability. However, given that things in the universe are for the most part deterministic atleast on the macro scale, one could argue that if it occurred by chance, the "real probability" of him guessing 7 straight lotteries is the probability of whatever initial conditions. Given those initial conditions, the lottery wins occurring AND them being predicted by chance correctly were necessary.

Now, every series of initial conditions has further preceding conditions. We can keep backtracking these initial conditions all the way to the early universe or whatever first cause there is.

Is it true then that the question now becomes what is more likely: a universe or first cause with the right initial conditions that would eventually result in him guessing 7 lotteries VS. an All powerful all knowing god always existing who wanted him to predict 7 lotteries? If so, can one then use Occam’s razor to rule out God given that the former is arguably simpler?

Answer 1

The probability of correctly guessing the winners of the lottery for seven consecutive days is extremely low. The question of whether it is more likely for the universe to have the right initial conditions or for an all-powerful god to exist cannot be definitively answered. Occam's razor suggests that the former explanation of the universe having the right initial conditions is simpler.

Step-by-step explanation:

In the given scenario, the person claims to predict the winners of the lottery for the next seven days. The chance of guessing the correct winner for each day is given as 1 in 8 million. Considering that cheating is impossible, there are three possible explanations: chance, an all-powerful god, or some unknown natural or supernatural process.

If we assume that the wins occurred by chance, the probability of correctly guessing the winners for seven consecutive days is extremely low. However, it is important to consider the initial conditions that led to these wins. Each series of initial conditions has further preceding conditions, which can be traced back to the early universe or the first cause. Therefore, we can question whether it is more likely that the universe had the right initial conditions to result in these specific wins, or if an all-powerful god always existed and guided the person to predict the wins.

Using Occam's razor, we can argue that the former explanation of the universe having the right initial conditions is simpler compared to the existence of an all-powerful god. However, it is important to note that this reasoning is based on probabilities and philosophical arguments, and does not provide definitive proof for or against the existence of a god.