= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
byrnema comments on Confidence levels inside and outside an argument - 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 (174)
I would say that according to my model (i.e. inside the argument (in this post's terminology)), it's not possible that that isn't true, but that I assign greater than 0% credence to the outside-the-argument possibility that I'm wrong about what's possible.
(A few relevant posts: How to Convince Me That 2 + 2 = 3; But There's Still A Chance, Right?; The Fallacy of Gray)
What is it that is true? (Just to clarify..)
This:
Discarding 0 and 1 from the game implies, that we have a positive probability - that they are wrongly excluded.