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 Evidential probability falls within attempts to establish the epistemic use of classical statistics
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Evidential probability, as developed by Kyburg, operates as a purely logical relation between evidence and hypothesis, independent of frequentist sampling distributions.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Classical statistics grounds inference in long-run frequency behavior of procedures, not in logical relationships between propositions.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
A framework that rejects the procedural foundation of classical statistics cannot coherently be classified as an epistemic extension of it.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Hacking's distinction between inference to the truth of hypotheses and the classical statistician's evaluation of procedures shows these are fundamentally incompatible epistemic projects.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Evidential probability assigns degrees of belief to singular propositions, whereas classical statistics deliberately avoids such assignments to maintain objectivity.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
Evidential probability was developed as a logical system to deal consistently with the results of classical statistical analyses
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.