3 ms·
That sounds strictly inferior to Bayesian reasoning (both to me and to my Wordle program), so I’m curious what advantages abduction has, if any. (If there are p
by pjscott 4y ago
That sounds strictly inferior to Bayesian reasoning (both to me and to my Wordle program), so I’m curious what advantages abduction has, if any. (If there are philosophers reading this: do you have any good, non-paywalled links defending abduction from the usual Bayesian criticism?)
- stu2b50 4y agoThe book that is the parent submission is classified as "open" and you can click on the pdfs for each section to, well, read each section. It seems as good a source about the benefits of abduction as any.
- pjscott 4y agoOh! I had assumed that it was closed. Thanks!
- geysersam 4y agoCould it be more computationally tractable compared to Baysian inference?
- zwkrt 4y agoDo you think that abduction is just a more realistic name for “bayesian inference where I had to make up some of my own priors”? To computer program, playing Wordle seems like a perfect application of completely solid bayesian inference. All the data is there, the space is finite. But humans have to at some level resort to abductive reasoning since we can’t do all that math in our heads. Most people that play wordle would just tell you “this guess felt like the right one”