rhollerith_dot_com comments on Swimming in Reasons - Less Wrong

8 Post author: steven0461 10 April 2010 01:24AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (17)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: rhollerith_dot_com 10 April 2010 07:51:31AM 1 point [-]

Beliefs ought to bob around in the stream of evidence as a random walk without trend.

If previous evidence actually supports a belief, ..., further evidence is more likely to support the belief than not.

By "belief", grandparent means probability of a hypothesis, which does bob around without trend in a perfect Bayesian reasoner.

Comment author: magfrump 11 April 2010 01:30:51AM 1 point [-]

The impression I get of the difference here between a "belief" and a "hypothesis" is something like this:

I have the belief that the sun will continue to rise for a long long time.

This is probably "true."

I have the hypothesis that the sun will rise tomorrow morning with probability .999999

Conservation of expected evidence requires that in pure Bayesian fashion, if it does rise tomorrow my probability will rise to .9999991 and if it doesn't it will shoot down to .3 or something in a way that makes the view of all possible shifts a random walk.

That is, if your hypothesis is "true" you have great confidence, if it is true too often you are underconfident and the hypothesis has an issue.