Comment on Popperian Decision making

Thu, 07 Apr 2011 21:53:35 GMT

Examples of mistakes in processing evidence people make in real life which lead to bad results, and how Bayesian reasoning resolves them, followed by concrete applications such as the review of the Amanda Knox trial.

Have you already looked at the review of the Amanda Knox trial? If you haven't, it might be a useful point for us to examine.

It doesn't help anyone to point out an example of inductive reasoning, say "this is a mistake" because you reject the foundations of inductive reasoning, but not demonstrate how rejecting it leads to better results than accepting it. So far the examples you have given of the supposed benefits of Critical Rationalism have been achievements of people who can only be loosely associated with Critical Rationalism, or arguments in a frame of Critical Rationalism for things that have already been argued for outside a frame of Critical Rationalism.

Discuss