51 ms·
Those are not the only options, those are the two extremes of a spectrum. Most people fall in the middle with something like "assume people are innocent unless
by burkaman 1y ago
Those are not the only options, those are the two extremes of a spectrum. Most people fall in the middle with something like "assume people are innocent unless you see convincing evidence of guilt". This is a reasonable philosophy unless you have power over someone, in which case proof is much more important.
- qualeed 1y ago>"assume people are innocent unless you see convincing evidence of guilt". So... base assumption is innocent. That's all I was saying.
- eru 1y agoNo. Base assumption doesn't have to be binary. Just get some background rates, and assume that people are guilty with eg 0.1% probability. (Just a made a up number. Real priors should depend on a lot more context.)
- burkaman 1y agoOk, I think you may have misinterpreted some other comments then. The argument was that "proven" in "innocent until proven guilt" is too high a bar for a low-stakes internet discussion.