It is fully proven by the math, but it requires a set of stringent conditions about honesty and shared information which are unlikely to obtain in real world situations. As explained in the rationality article. Did you read it?
It’s not that you misunderstood the summary versions, it’s that the summary versions are inaccurate. In general, you should summarise something as it operates under the prevalent, realistic conditions. So “you can’t use Bayes for everything” and “people aren’t suddenly going to start agreeing, even if they are rational”.
It is fully proven by the math, but it requires a set of stringent conditions about honesty and shared information which are unlikely to obtain in real world situations. As explained in the rationality article. Did you read it?
It’s not that you misunderstood the summary versions, it’s that the summary versions are inaccurate. In general, you should summarise something as it operates under the prevalent, realistic conditions. So “you can’t use Bayes for everything” and “people aren’t suddenly going to start agreeing, even if they are rational”.