Bayesians Sometimes Cannot Ignore Even Very Implausible Theories
نویسندگان
چکیده
In applying Bayes’s theorem to the history of science, Bayesians sometimes assume – often without argument – that they can safely ignore very implausible theories. This assumption is false, both in that it can seriously distort the history of science as well as the mathematics and the applicability of Bayes’s theorem. There are intuitively very plausible counter-examples. In fact, one can ignore very implausible or unknown theories only if at least one of two conditions is satisfied: (i) one is certain that there are no unknown theories which explain the phenomenon in question, or (ii) the likelihood of at least one of the known theories used in the calculation of the posterior is reasonably large. Often in the history of science, a very surprising phenomenon is observed, and neither of these criteria is satisfied.
منابع مشابه
Running head : NONSTRATEGIC PLAUSIBILITY MONITORING
We present evidence for a nonstrategic monitoring of event-based plausibility during language comprehension by showing that readers cannot ignore the implausibility of information even if it is detrimental to the task at hand. In two experiments using a Strooplike paradigm, participants were required to provide positive and negative responses independent of plausibility in an orthographical tas...
متن کاملOn Bayesian problem-solving: helping Bayesians solve simple Bayesian word problems
(2015) On Bayesian problem-solving: helping Bayesians solve simple Bayesian word problems. Resolving the " Bayesian Paradox " —Bayesians Who Failed to Solve Bayesian Problems A well-supported conclusion a reader would draw from the vast amount of research on Bayesian inference could be distilled into one sentence: " People are profoundly Bayesians, but they fail to solve Bayesian word problems....
متن کاملUnderstanding Non-bayesians
Once one becomes used to thinking about inference from a Bayesian perspective, it becomes difficult to understand why many econometricians are uncomfortable with that way of thinking. But some very good econometricians are either firmly nonBayesian or (more commonly these days) think of Bayesian approaches as a “tool” which might sometimes be appropriate, sometimes not. This paper tries to arti...
متن کاملImprecise and Indeterminate Probabilities
Bayesian advocates of expected utility maximization use sets of probability distributions to represent very different ideas. Strict Bayesians insist that probability judgment is numerically determinate even though the agent can represent such judgments only in imprecise terms. According to Quasi Bayesians rational agents may make indeterminate subjective probability judgments. Both kinds of Bay...
متن کاملHempel’s Raven Paradox: A Lacuna in the Standard Bayesian Solution
According to Hempel’s paradox, evidence (E) that an object is a nonblack nonraven confirms the hypothesis (H) that every raven is black. According to the standard Bayesian solution, E does confirm H but only to a minute degree. This solution relies on the almost never explicitly defended assumption that the probability of H should not be affected by evidence that an object is nonblack. I argue ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2007