that is not how Bayesian stats works (!!!)... A prior is initially not based on any data if you so wish it to be!
-
-
Replying to @o_guest @richarddmorey
No, but it is based on your prior experience. In my book that counts as "data".
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Ugnudabul @o_guest
I guess you can define data however you like, but that's not typically how the word is used.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @Ugnudabul @o_guest
I just said it. And since you qualified it with "in my book" I know to some extent you agree.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
otherwise it would not have made any sense to say "in my book"
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @richarddmorey @o_guest
my "says who" was actually meant for your comment about what is/isn't a typical use of the word "data".
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Ugnudabul @o_guest
yes, I know. And the very common distinction between anecdote (which can be an experience) and data is evidence for that
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @richarddmorey @Ugnudabul
even one person's data is another anecdote and vice versa – this is literally where philosophy/belief comes in!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @richarddmorey
but when a boxer goes jogging to stay in shape we don't call it boxing, even though it helps them box better.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
what? I get this is sophistry but no idea to what end.
-
-
Replying to @o_guest @richarddmorey
scientists can engage in philosophy and faith to help them do more science. But should we call it science?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - 7 more replies
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.