The paper is interesting, thanks for pointing it out. They make a curious reference to the US political elections in 2016 that could have probably been replac

The paper is interesting, thanks for pointing it out. They make a curious reference to the US political elections in 2016 that could have probably been replaced by a less 2010s-US-centered topic. For those skeptical of the necessity to revisit centuries-old documents for anything other than the history of science, the authors give their insights at the end of the paper: > Laplace’s attempts to understand the underlying mechanisms for people’s biases were highly original, insightful, in many ways were centuries ahead of their time, and in at least two instances produced novel conjectures that have not been tested to this day. We believe that modern-day social and behavioral scientists can benefit from revisiting Laplace’s thinking on illusions in the estimation of probabilities, and beyond.