I abandoned my essay explaining why Bayes is not a theory of rationality when I realized no one was stupid enough to actually think that.
-
-
-
Maybe I need to update that hypothesis? This was concerning Cox’s Theorem, in particular. Is anyone actually confused about that?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
@themattsimpson That’s why I stopped. But it’s clear that Jaynes did, and I think EY did for a while at least.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@themattsimpson Ah, that’s important. Computational complexity is not my issue. It’s massively incomplete even with free Bayesian updates.
-
@themattsimpson The point is that Bayes only subsumes propositional logic. No quantification.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
@themattsimpson Admittedly, I haven’t written it up! Maybe I should after all.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@themattsimpson "Every vertebrate has exactly one father" is an example from my draft…
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@themattsimpson “1.8.2 Nitpicking” p. 23 in http://www.med.mcgill.ca/epidemiology/hanley/bios601/GaussianModel/JaynesProbabilityTheory.pdf … He’s utterly confused
-
@themattsimpson He misunderstands propositional vs predicate and Aristotelian vs predicate and Aristotelian vs non-Aristotelian, inter alia
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.