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
    Using Bayes' theorem as a mathematical identity does not ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Any inductive logic that employs the same probability functions to represent both the probabilities of evidence claims due to hypotheses and the probabilities of hypotheses due to evidence claims must be a Bayesian inductive logic.

    Using Bayes' theorem as a mathematical identity does not entail the epistemic commitments—priors, conditionalization, coherence—that define Bayesian inference as a normative framework.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Key Terms

    Bayes' Theorem(as used in probability and epistemology)
    A mathematical rule that shows how to update your beliefs when you get new evidence, named after Thomas Bayes, an 18th-century mathematician.
    Bayesian inference(the reasoning method being used to evaluate the two worldviews)
    A logical method for updating your beliefs based on new evidence: if new evidence fits better with one explanation than another, you should shift your confidence toward that explanation.
    Epistemic commitments(describing the foundational assumptions required for logical reasoning)
    The basic beliefs or assumptions we have to accept in order to think and reason at all—things we're essentially committed to believing.
    Mathematical identity(what the statement questions whether we can establish through structural similarity alone)
    Whether two mathematical objects are literally the same thing (the number 2 as described in different ways is still the same number 2).

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Explore a random proposition
    Start fresh with something unrelated.
    Normative framework(the broader system of rules that might underlie moral language)
    A set of rules or standards about how things *should* be or *ought* to be done, rather than how they actually are.
    Priors(as used in probability and epistemology)
    Your initial assumptions or beliefs about how likely something is before you consider new evidence (like guessing the probability before looking at the facts).
    coherence(Applied uniformly by Bosanquet to both religious and non-religious truth claims.)
    The standard by which truth is assessed — a belief or system of beliefs is true insofar as it forms a consistent, internally unified whole.
    conditionalization(Bayesian epistemology)
    The process of updating prior beliefs to interim beliefs by conditioning on the agent's hard information

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    Any inductive logic that employs the same probability functions to represent bot...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective