Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 12-04-2009, 05:56 PM
Tyrrell McAllister Tyrrell McAllister is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 121
Default Re: Percontations: The Nature of Probability (Eliezer Yudkowsky & Andrew Gelman)

Originally Posted by bbbeard
Are you saying it's a theorem that p(H | E1 & E2) = p(H | ~E1 & E2) = p(H | E2)?
No. I'm saying that the conjunction of

p(H | E1) > p(H),


p(H | E1 & E2) = p(H | ~E1 & E2) = p(H | E2)

might very well happen in this particular case.

I frankly don't even understand what you mean by the "probability that H is true given E1".
I'm using "the probability that H is true given E1" to mean "the amount of credence that you ought to have in H if E1 is your only evidence."

In what universe could the "probability" of H depend on the prior opinions of experts?
Again, probability is the proper amount of credence. So, if the prior opinions of experts is the best evidence you have on the matter, your credence should depend on those opinions.
Reply With Quote

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:54 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.