So what I'm wondering is whether under frequentism P(hypothesis | data) is actually meaningless.
It's not meaningless, but people who follow R. A. Fisher's ideas for rejecting the null do not use p(hypothesis | data). "Meaningless" would be if frequentists literally did not have p(hypothesis | data) in their language, which is not true because they use probability theory just like everybody else.
Don't ask lesswrong about what frequentists claim, ask frequentists. Very few people on lesswrong are statisticians.
"Meaningless" would be if frequentists literally did not have p(hypothesis | data) in their language, which is not true because they use probability theory just like everybody else.
Many frequentists do insist that P(hypothesis) are meaningless, despite "using probability theory."
If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post (even in Discussion), then it goes here.
Duration set to six days to encourage Monday as first day.