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?
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.
-
-
If you ignore quantifiers, then yeah, the math is really simple.
-
Jaynes did sometimes dismiss problems outside his mastery, which was a flaw. That said, MIRI has done pioneering work on applying probability to logical sentences and relaxing the assumption of logical omniscience. http://intelligence.org/files/LogicalInduction.pdf …
- 1 more reply
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.