The only 'Bayesian' bit is the final, utterly trivial step of going outside and looking.
-
-
Replying to @simplic10
@St_Rev It seems like you're just pointing out that defining terms clearly enough that they can be assigned a truth value is hard work...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simplic10
@St_Rev ...and Bayes doesn't help with that. That's true. Neither does classical logic. "Are all swans white?" "1st let's define 'swan.'"3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simplic10
@simplic10@St_Rev > pop Bayes obscures this by claiming to be the one true theory of uncertainty.1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness@St_Rev I do not so claim. Some do.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simplic10
@Meaningness@St_Rev I'm not sure we have substantive disagreement here. I see community of people trying fallibly to be saner, you see...1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @simplic10
@Meaningness@St_Rev ...enough man-w-hammerism wrt to Bayes to write community off.5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@simplic10 @St_Rev Not write off! Dithering about whether and how to help!
-
-
-
Replying to @simplic10
@simplic10@Meaningness Oh god. A Bayesian rewrite of Illuminatus.0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
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.