Here Arnold just repeats a very standard distinction in probability. Not sure what there is to talk about unless we want to repeat standard debates about which concept is better for what.
unless we want to repeat standard debates about which concept is better for what.
Well, yes. Eliezer has suggested that "The ancient war between the Bayesians and the accursèd frequentists stretches back through decades", but Kilng's post describes a class of problems for which he presents the frequentist approach as being the reasonable one. I had rather hoped for a discussion, even if it started "standard".
Related to: Beautiful Probability, Probability is in the Mind
Arnold Kling ponders probability:
In the tradition of Reddit, and a little inspired by Robin, this is a simple link to an interesting page somewhere else - I leave comment and discussion to the very awesome Less Wrong community.
Edit: Eliezer has in the past been uncomplimentary of the "accursèd frequentists". In at least Beautiful Probability and Probability is in the Mind, he has characterized (for at least some problems) the "frequentist" approach as being wrong, and the "Bayesian" approach as being right. Kling suggests different problems for which different approaches are approrpriate.