Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The likelihood ratio of naked statistical evidence in cases such as Prisoner and Gatecrasher is strictly speaking unknown, not determinately one or greater than one.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.In cases such as Prisoner and Gatecrasher, the likelihood ratio of naked statistical evidence can take a range of different values depending on the background information taken into account.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Because the likelihood ratio varies with background information, it cannot be fixed at any single value.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hacking's frequentist constraint holds that probability statements require a well-defined reference class, and naked statistics like '60% of prisoners escaped' underdetermine the reference class.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When the reference class is underdetermined, the likelihood ratio inherits that indeterminacy and cannot be resolved to a single value by logical analysis alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Walley's imprecise probability framework formalizes this: where evidence underdetermines the reference class, the rational response is a set of likelihoods, not a point estimate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The likelihood ratio requires specifying a precise alternative hypothesis, but naked statistical evidence fixes no such alternative, leaving the ratio formally undefined.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Keynes's weight-of-evidence concept shows that low evidential weight entails irreducible interval-valued probabilities, not point values, making a determinate ratio impossible.
      ?

      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.