Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Bayesian epistemology is not about any real phenomena and does not describe genuine norms governing real phenomena
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
There is typically no such psychological state as an agent's credence in a proposition
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Theories that are not about real phenomena, like alchemy and phlogiston theory, do not describe genuine governing norms
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Browse more in Skepticism
Related propositions within the same area of thought.