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?
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @Meaningness
Isn’t this Taleb’s lifelong mission? Though I think Cosmo Shalizi is best-in-class. Takes a probabilist to catch a probabilist generally,
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @vgr
Lots of people understand that probabilism is wrong. And, lots of people write about how it is wrong. What seems missing is a comprehensive list of all the ways it’s wrong.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @vgr
I think no one has done that because there’s like 20 fatal defects, and if you want to argue against it, it seems like one conclusive argument should be sufficient. Who wants to comb the literature to find another 19?
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @vgr
Surely, some synthesis of those 20 defects is possible. It's not as if they're random (*wink*). Rather, there's a fundamental problem of modeling of which the 20 defects are manifestations. But still, it would be hard work to achieve this synthesis in a compelling manner.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Yes! I do think that many are variations on a theme, and people keep discovering new versions and publishing them without recognizing that. So, yes, a catalog would also be a valuable step toward a synthesis.
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.