I have to thank you a lot for posting this. This is exactly what I've been saying for a while, especially the distinction between probabilities and plausibiliti

I have to thank you a lot for posting this. This is exactly what I've been saying for a while, especially the distinction between probabilities and plausibilities (degrees of belief). I wasn't sure if this is just an idiosyncrasy of mine, or if someone else uses this distinction (see a question of mine on StackExchange [1]). Anyway, thinking this way takes the wind out of the sails of many arguments in the Bayesian/Frequentist debate. Degrees of belief are not identical with probabilities ("frequencies"), but they are very useful, and you should have both in your toolbelt. Trying to use only one and calling yourself a Bayesian or Frequentist is very limiting in the end. [1] http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/32757/probability-vs-degree-of-belief-in-facts-of-nature-plausibility http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/32757/probability...