This implies that there is a meaningful value of epsilon. I doubt that.
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness
"that there is" in what sense? That it can be computed, or that there was an epsilon they used and at some point threw out? or
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FateOfTwist_ @Meaningness
or that their beliefs can somehow be modelled probabilistically and there is an epsilon somewhere in there?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FateOfTwist_
Well, you said the right formulation is "when you say 'x is true,' you're dropping the epsilon for computational efficacy
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
which appears to be claiming that there’s some sort of metaphysical reality in which there definitely is an epsilon,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
in which case, burden is on you to explain what it is & where it comes from & what it means & Y we should believe in it!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
All theories define their own metaphysical realities. You should 'believe' it if the theory is useful
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FateOfTwist_
Yes… But in lots of cases probability is not useful!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
well, it's not useful at object level but I think it's useful for general statements. Offers interesting explanation of...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FateOfTwist_ @Meaningness
prevalence of logical thinking when probability is in some sense more nuanced
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Yes; many people do seem to think they have to either believe or disbelieve everything
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.