2 ms·
I read the preface and there are things I agree with and things I find problematic depending on how the author goes about explaining them. The major one of thes
by anonymouskimmer 3y ago
I read the preface and there are things I agree with and things I find problematic depending on how the author goes about explaining them. The major one of these last is the seeming identity of probability with randomness.
Statistics and probability are tools humans use to predict outcomes of the world, they are not necessarily accurate reflections of the mechanisms of the world. Maybe I'm strawmanning the author here, I don't know. I may read the full book at some point but probably not yet.
There may very well be a limit where events are random (such as particle decay), but surely even fully determined events can have probabilistic outcomes, when aggregated. Like say you have 4 beads, 3 black and 1 white. And you non-blindly align all combinations of three beads. You'll have four combinations, three of which contain a white bead. So the probabilistic odds of any one combination of three beads containing a white bead is 75%. If a person picks three beads based on preference, another person can say that there's a 75% chance that those three beads will contain a white bead, iterated over enough picks. But the actual picking for all picks is fully determined by the current preference of the person picking the three beads.
- DiogenesKynikos 3y agoThe book discusses the two sources of randomness early on: unknown information and true randomness. It even identifies Democritus and Epicurus as the philosophers who first identified these sources of randomness.
- anonymouskimmer 3y agoThank you. I look forward to reading it now.
- hgsgm 3y ago> If a person picks three beads based on preference, another person can say that there's a 75% chance that those three beads will contain a white bead, iterated over enough picks. That's not true, which is the critical point, because preference is not independent.
- anonymouskimmer 3y agoPreference among multiple unrelated people is, at least hypothetically, independent.
- DasCorCor 3y ago“… they are not necessarily accurate reflections of the mechanisms of the world.” I would suggest taking a few courses on Quantum Mechanics. ;)