Ok, I think I see. On some level, I even agree. I don’t have high confidence in any opinion on the topic, including my own. In a Bayesian sense, it wouldn’t take much evidence to move my opinion. But (and this is stronger than just conservation of expected evidence—it’s not about direction, but about strength) I don’t think anyone will GET strong evidence about what actions COULD be successful.
I agree with you that all of the casual debate (I know nothing of what military or State Department leaders are thinking; they’re pretty rational in being quiet rather than public) is fairly meaningless signaling and over-fitting of topics into their preferred conflict models. I disagree that there’s a good alternative, and I’m not sure if you think people should just shut up or if there are good opinions they should weigh more heavily. I get value from the (stupid and object-level useless) discussion and posting, in that it shows people’s priors and models more clearly than otherwise.
I don’t think anyone will GET strong evidence about what actions COULD be successful.
Seems plausible.
I disagree that there’s a good alternative, and I’m not sure if you think people should just shut up or if there are good opinions they should weigh more heavily. I get value from the (stupid and object-level useless) discussion and posting, in that it shows people’s priors and models more clearly than otherwise.
I think that it is definitely ok for people to talk about their models and opinions. I agree that getting a sense of peoples models and priors is often useful. And I think that some opinions are better than others and should be valued more heavily, even when none of them are particularly accurate.
Ok, I think I see. On some level, I even agree. I don’t have high confidence in any opinion on the topic, including my own. In a Bayesian sense, it wouldn’t take much evidence to move my opinion. But (and this is stronger than just conservation of expected evidence—it’s not about direction, but about strength) I don’t think anyone will GET strong evidence about what actions COULD be successful.
I agree with you that all of the casual debate (I know nothing of what military or State Department leaders are thinking; they’re pretty rational in being quiet rather than public) is fairly meaningless signaling and over-fitting of topics into their preferred conflict models. I disagree that there’s a good alternative, and I’m not sure if you think people should just shut up or if there are good opinions they should weigh more heavily. I get value from the (stupid and object-level useless) discussion and posting, in that it shows people’s priors and models more clearly than otherwise.
Seems plausible.
I think that it is definitely ok for people to talk about their models and opinions. I agree that getting a sense of peoples models and priors is often useful. And I think that some opinions are better than others and should be valued more heavily, even when none of them are particularly accurate.