Can you recommend an overview of everything wrong with probabilistic epistemology? I haven’t found one. There’s lots of papers that say “this particular objection is fatal, so why don’t you guys stop pretending,” but maybe no compendium of those?
-
-
Good heavens. Have philosophers never read about how Bayes nets work? Uncertain observations are technology at this point; you send up a non-extreme lambda message. (And this doesn't even violate probability theorems qua theorems, as so many approximations understandably do.)
-
I discussed Bayes nets in that piece. Jaynes didn’t understand logical quantifiers. He explicitly says he thinks they are philosophical bs and he’s going to ignore them.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Phil is a great place to start learning about a lot of stuff.
-
That’s true!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Yes, reading that one is what prompted my plea for recommendations! (Funny coincidence!) It’s good but less broad than I want.
End of conversation
New conversation
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.