On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 11:35 AM Brent Meeker <meekerbr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/21/2022 4:33 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 11:08 AM Brent Meeker <meekerbr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> He's wrong that frequentism does not empirically support probability >> statements. He goes off on a tangent by referring to "other gamblers". >> Nothing in physics is certain, yet Deutsch takes a bunch of definite >> assertions and claims they alone are the real physics. >> > > His critique of frequentism is just a recap of arguments that are well > known -- you cannot ground probability theory in frequentism, or the idea > that probabilities are nothing more than ratios of long-run frequencies. > Long-run frequencies might approximate the probabilities, but they cannot > be used to ground probability theory -- for well known reasons. I agree > that he goes off on a number of irrelevant tangents, and he is wrong to > suppose that frequentism is a main-stream theory of probability (at least, > these days). > > > But frequencies are how we test probabilistic theories. > Testing is not a theoretical grounding of the theory. Bruce -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLTNVrzp0JRzjwLU_2qb6nosugcSoGYuhtt%3D3Edq9dLOFQ%40mail.gmail.com.
