3 ms·

This is a prime example of someone claiming to be neutral or centrist to push their agenda while holding a falsified high ground. You see it all the time on Red

• zepto 8y ago
  You may be right, but it’s also possible that you are projecting your own bias onto what the author is doing. If you read his pieces, it’s clear that his focus is on Bayesian probability and reasoning in general. That question is interesting, because you can certainly read it as a leading question. But you can also just take it at face value. One answer might be that the fraction is likely to be close to 100%, since there is a good chance that the population is just one, and we know that she actually did. What fraction of people can tell the difference between a Bayesian economist asking a question with an uninituitive answer, and someone with a ‘falsified’ agenda to push?