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
    Wolpert and Macready's NFL theorems presuppose a uniform ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The No-Free-Lunch theorems are versions of the argument in Hume's first fork

    Wolpert and Macready's NFL theorems presuppose a uniform prior over all possible target functions, a substantive assumption Hume's skeptical argument does not require.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.NFL theorems mathematically assume equiprobability across all target functions, making this assumption explicit and verifiable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Hume's induction skepticism operates at a more fundamental epistemological level, questioning justification without presupposing any probability distribution.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The uniform prior is contingent to NFL's conclusions; different priors yield different results, whereas Hume's argument holds regardless of priors.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Any learning algorithm implicitly embodies an inductive bias, which functions equivalently to a non-uniform prior, making the distinction less sharp.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Hume's skepticism also presupposes certain logical and metaphysical assumptions about causality and uniformity of nature that are substantive premises.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Both arguments require background assumptions; distinguishing 'substantive' from 'non-substantive' assumptions is itself philosophically contested and unclear.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    Any learning algorithm implicitly embodies an inductive bias, which functions eq...Both arguments require background assumptions; distinguishing 'substantive' from...Hume's induction skepticism operates at a more fundamental epistemological level...Hume's skepticism also presupposes certain logical and metaphysical assumptions ...
    +3 moreShow less
    NFL theorems mathematically assume equiprobability across all target functions, ...The No-Free-Lunch theorems are versions of the argument in Hume's first forkThe uniform prior is contingent to NFL's conclusions; different priors yield dif...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit