Decius comments on Reflection in Probabilistic Logic - Less Wrong

63 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 24 March 2013 04:37PM

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

Comments (171)

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

Comment author: Decius 31 March 2013 06:00:46PM 1 point [-]

Suppose that my method of assigning probabilities about things that should not update on new evidence of any kind (invisible dragons) is to assign them either a very low probability (something which I almost always do), or a very high probability (something I very rarely do)?

This statement seems insane in that one should always update based only on one's current evaluation of it is (if you make the change "less than or equal to 30%", it has a stable solution)