>frequentism largely pretends that it doesn't exist. The ongoing replication crisis shows why this is not merely pedantry, but the single most urgent issue in s

>frequentism largely pretends that it doesn't exist. The ongoing replication crisis shows why this is not merely pedantry, but the single most urgent issue in science. If you mean that Frequentist methods have no way of dealing with parameter uncertainty then your statement is false. If you mean that some people who use Frequentist methods don't deal with parameter uncertainty then it may sometimes be the case.