It’s certainly an important point, but I think that atheists tend to overuse it. I can’t begin to criticize Bayesian reasoning, especially not here.
Bayesian probabilistic reasoning is the unique (up to isomorphism) generalization of Aristotelian (two-valued) logic to reasoning about uncertainty. You can’t throw it out without inconsistency.
I never tried to. I know exactly how Bayes’ Theorem is mathematically derived and I won’t try to contest that.
Current theme: default
Less Wrong (text)
Less Wrong (link)
Arrow keys: Next/previous image
Escape or click: Hide zoomed image
Space bar: Reset image size & position
Scroll to zoom in/out
(When zoomed in, drag to pan; double-click to close)
Keys shown in yellow (e.g., ]) are accesskeys, and require a browser-specific modifier key (or keys).
]
Keys shown in grey (e.g., ?) do not require any modifier keys.
?
Esc
h
f
a
m
v
c
r
q
t
u
o
,
.
/
s
n
e
;
Enter
[
\
k
i
l
=
-
0
′
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
→
↓
←
↑
Space
x
z
`
g
It’s certainly an important point, but I think that atheists tend to overuse it. I can’t begin to criticize Bayesian reasoning, especially not here.
Bayesian probabilistic reasoning is the unique (up to isomorphism) generalization of Aristotelian (two-valued) logic to reasoning about uncertainty. You can’t throw it out without inconsistency.
I never tried to. I know exactly how Bayes’ Theorem is mathematically derived and I won’t try to contest that.