You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Tetronian comments on Bayesian Epistemology vs Popper - Less Wrong Discussion

-1 Post author: curi 06 April 2011 11:50PM

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

Comments (226)

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

Comment author: [deleted] 07 April 2011 01:05:19PM 0 points [-]

If I understand correctly, I think curi is saying that there's no reason for probability and epistemology to be the same thing. That said, I don't entirely understand his/her argument in this thread, as some of the criticisms he/she mentions are vague. For example, what are these "epistemological problems" that Popper solves but Bayes doesn't?