Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Luck
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
===Fallacy=== Another view holds that "luck is probability taken personally." A [[rationalist]] approach to luck includes the application of the rules of [[probability]] and an avoidance of [[scientific method|unscientific]] beliefs. The rationalist thinks that the belief in luck is a result of poor reasoning or [[wishful thinking]]. To a rationalist, a believer in luck who asserts that something has influenced his or her luck commits the "[[post hoc ergo propter hoc]]" [[logical fallacy]]: that because two events are connected sequentially, they are connected causally as well. In general, this fallacy is that: #A luck-attracting event or action happens; #Then a positive outcome happens; #Therefore, the event or action influenced the outcome. More contemporary authors writing on the subject believe that the definition of good destiny is: One who enjoys good health; has the physical and mental capabilities of achieving his goals in life; has good appearance, and; has happiness in mind and is not prone to accidents.<ref>{{cite web|title=How to be Lucky and Successful in Life|author=Sumit Kumar Sirkar, Pothi|year=2010|page=5|url=http://pothi.com/pothi/book/sumit-kumar-sirkar-how-be-lucky-and-successful-life|publisher=Pothi.com|access-date=2012-10-04}}</ref> In the rationalist perspective, probability is only affected by confirmed causal connections. The [[gambler's fallacy]] and [[inverse gambler's fallacy]] both explain some reasoning problems in common beliefs in luck. They involve denying the unpredictability of [[random]] events: "I haven't rolled a seven all week, so I'll definitely roll one tonight". [[Philosopher]] [[Daniel Dennett]] wrote that "luck is ''mere'' luck" rather than a property of a person or thing.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=6SPBOq1BCf0C&pg=PA92 Elbow Room] by Daniel Clement Dennett, p. 92. "We know it would be superstitious to believe that "there actually is such a thing as luck" - something a rabbits' foot might bring - but we nevertheless think there is an unsuperstitious and unmisleading way of characterising events and properties as ''merely'' lucky."</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)