= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
timtyler comments on You can't believe in Bayes - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (58)
As a young rationalist, I considered "belief" to refer to certainty, and proudly procalimed my lack of belief in anything. "I believe" - became a term of mockery - pronounced with the intonation of a preacher: "aaaah believe..." .
However, not everyone has adopted this meaning. Since it renders the term practically useless, this seems understandable.
Yes, I remember thinking that as well. I grew out of it. What puzzles me is why I, or anyone, could ever have thought that, since the word is not actually used that way, nor defined so in any dictionary. In actual use, it means to take as true; in a religious context, to have faith, i.e. to take as true in despite of the absence of evidence. And to take as true is to be willing to act on the premise that it is true. Which in turn is very like the thresholding spoken of in the original post: when 1-p is an epsilon too small to be worth tracking.
Colloquially, "I believe" even expresses a certain positive degree of doubt, a step below saying "I know".
In my case, I think it came from religion - where belief and unquestioning faith are concepts which are freely intermingled - and doubt is the start of the path to damnation.
I avoid saying "I believe" to this day - since the connotations of faith still seem to be present.