Should the mind projection fallacy actually be considered a fallacy? It seems like being unable to imagine a scenario where something is possible is in fact Bayesian evidence that it is impossible, but only weak Bayesian evidence. Being unable to imagine a scenario where 2+2=5, for instance, could be considered evidence that 2+2 ever equaling 5 is impossible.
being unable to imagine a scenario where something is possible
This isn’t an accurate description of the mind projection fallacy. The mind projection fallacy happens when someone thinks that some phenomenon occurs in the real world but in fact the phenomenon is a part of the way their mind works.
But yes, it’s common to almost all fallacies that they are in fact weak Bayesian evidence for whatever they were supposed to support.
Accusations that something or other is a mind-projection generally lack rigorous criteria. The conclusion of a mind-projection argument generally end up supporting the intuitions of the person making it.
Should the mind projection fallacy actually be considered a fallacy? It seems like being unable to imagine a scenario where something is possible is in fact Bayesian evidence that it is impossible, but only weak Bayesian evidence. Being unable to imagine a scenario where 2+2=5, for instance, could be considered evidence that 2+2 ever equaling 5 is impossible.
This isn’t an accurate description of the mind projection fallacy. The mind projection fallacy happens when someone thinks that some phenomenon occurs in the real world but in fact the phenomenon is a part of the way their mind works.
But yes, it’s common to almost all fallacies that they are in fact weak Bayesian evidence for whatever they were supposed to support.
Accusations that something or other is a mind-projection generally lack rigorous criteria. The conclusion of a mind-projection argument generally end up supporting the intuitions of the person making it.