Given presumptions (1), (2), and you can (3), how come this new conflict on the earliest achievement wade?
Find now, very first, that the proposal \(P\) comes into only towards the earliest while the 3rd ones premises, and furthermore, your details away from both of these premise is easily secure
In the long run, to determine next completion-which is, one to in line with the history degree together with proposition \(P\) it is likely to be than simply not that God does not occur-Rowe means singular a lot more expectation:
\[ \tag <5>\Pr(P \mid k) = [\Pr(\negt G\mid k)\times \Pr(P \mid \negt G \amp k)] + [\Pr(G\mid k)\times \Pr(P \mid G \amp k)] \]
\[ \tag <6>\Pr(P \mid k) = [\Pr(\negt G\mid k) \times 1] + [\Pr(G\mid k)\times \Pr(P \mid G \amp k)] \]
However because from presumption (2) you will find you to \(\Pr(\negt Grams \mid k) \gt 0\), whilst in view of presumption (3) i’ve that \(\Pr(P \middle G \amp k) \lt step one\), meaning that you to definitely \([step one – \Pr(P \middle G \amp k)] \gt 0\), so it up coming observe off (9) you to definitely