3 ms·
I might take the bet but I would just be guessing or I might work towards trying to find a solution to turn the guess into an explanation. At no time does prob
by ThomPete 4y ago
I might take the bet but I would just be guessing or I might work towards trying to find a solution to turn the guess into an explanation.
At no time does probability help me with figuring out what the outcome is.
I can either explain what will happen or I can't. There is no 50/50. I just don't have the correct explanation i.e. an explanation that is hard to vary.
- kqr 4y agoCan I interpret your taking the bet as an admission that it's a bet that comes with a positive expectation? (In the sense that if you took similar bets very many times, you would end up with an almost sure profit.)
- ThomPete 4y agoNo. Just like i dont go to the casino expecting to win.
- kgwgk 4y agoDo you ever take an umbrella with you expecting that it may rain later?
- ThomPete 4y agoYes and often I don't end up using it. It will either rain where I am or it wont. I might as well believe in Thor the Thunder God as a theory for why I will bring an umbrella.
- kgwgk 4y agoEvery single day it will either rain or it won't. Sometimes you will take an umbrella. Based on what you consider the X of rain. That action of yours will be - you hope - non-causally correlated with reality in the sense that if you take the umbrella very many times, you would end up using it often enough to make it worth it. X is what people call 'probability'. How do you call it? [Thor's will?] Have you noticed any correlation between you taking the umbrella and rain later in the day?
- ThomPete 4y agoNone of that require probability. Ignorance is still ignorance even if you dress it up to sound scientific. You are just guessing.
- kgwgk 4y agoI don't know what does it mean to "require probability". I'd say that it "is probability". The concept that is in our heads, mind you. When you are guessing between the exhaustive and mutually exclusive outcomes A, B and C in such a way that guess(A)>0, guess(B)>0, guess(C)>0 and guess(A or B or C) = guess(A) + guess(B) + guess(C) = 1 and guess(A or B) = guess(A) + guess(B), guess(A or C) = guess(A) + guess(C), guess(B or C) = guess(B) + guess(C) then guess is a probability measure as defined by Kolmogorov, for example. That's why most people don't see any problem in calling that "probability". You may like the name of "guessing" better but insisting in that it should not be referred to as probability and it doesn't require probability seems an uphill battle.
- ThomPete 4y agoFighting for better modes of explanation is always an uphill battle. The point is that there is no difference between saying. It either happens or it don't. And then There is a 40% chance is happens. The 40% is not based on anything of consequence to the discussion at hand. Why use something that is completely separated from what it purports to make claims about? This is not just unscientific it's an anti-scientific approach.
- kgwgk 4y agoIf you see no difference between saying "it either rains or it doesn't" and saying that some days it's more likely to rain than other days I wonder why would you ever decide take an umbrella with you in case it rains later. But that's fine! This line of discussion seems exhausted.
- ThomPete 4y ago