I think affording ontological status to belief is a bit crazy as they do with probabilities but it’s a pragmatic stop-gap I suppose.

I think affording ontological status to belief is a bit crazy as they do with probabilities but it’s a pragmatic stop-gap I suppose.
====
i mean, we pretend to be all objective and then we use Bayesian all over the place like salt on a future sudden heart-attack victim’s plate which is a quantification of BELIEF of all things… and it seems to work and all but it’s weird. Frequentist makes a lot more sense even if it ends up wrong with incomplete information and somehow inserting “belief” into equations tends to function a little better.
  • Like

===

 

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


5 × two =

Leave a Reply