= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gjm comments on New Year's Prediction Thread (2014) - 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 (60)
Yep, exactly. (More precisely, bramflakes was making a point about the conjunction fallacy and I was reinforcing it with a bit of irony. Trying to, anyway.)
I'm not sure the conjunction fallacy should be of operational importance to the giving of predictions, unless there is betting involved. What should I do instead, simply state "Bitcoin will rise to $5,000."? That's completely uninteresting, and I fail to see how anyone could judge that prediction based on anything other than my credentials and their prejudices. Saying "Bitcoin will rise to $5,000 due to X." gives people a window into my thinking and lets them judge for themselves whether my assessment is likely.
You could say “Bitcoin will rise to $5,000 (for example, due to X).”
There's nothing at all wrong with making specific predictions. But it should be done with care, in view of our brains' tendency to infer higher rather than lower probability when they see something more specific.