Could you please clarify what you mean by “inverted”. Even a physical object could be “inverted” in more than one way. It could be turned upside down, or it could be reversed into a mirror image of itself, if concave it could be made convex, and so on.
By an “inversion” of a true statement, I take it that you mean a false statement which states what one might call the opposite of the true statement, contradicting the true statement. For example, if dogs live longer than cats, than an inversion of this claim would be the claim that cats live longer than dogs. One of these is true and the other false (I don’t know which one) and and they state what one might call the opposite of each other, contradicting each other.
But in one comment someone has a very different interpretation:
“But isn’t the aim here to find claims that are obviously correct in both directions?”
Your interpretation of “inversion” is correct. The aim is to find statements such that if told P, you say “yes, that’s what I would have expected”, but that you have the same reaction if instead you’re told not-P. See the linked post “Hindsight devalues science” for why such statements exist and why he’s looking for examples of them.
Could you please clarify what you mean by “inverted”. Even a physical object could be “inverted” in more than one way. It could be turned upside down, or it could be reversed into a mirror image of itself, if concave it could be made convex, and so on.
By an “inversion” of a true statement, I take it that you mean a false statement which states what one might call the opposite of the true statement, contradicting the true statement. For example, if dogs live longer than cats, than an inversion of this claim would be the claim that cats live longer than dogs. One of these is true and the other false (I don’t know which one) and and they state what one might call the opposite of each other, contradicting each other.
But in one comment someone has a very different interpretation:
“But isn’t the aim here to find claims that are obviously correct in both directions?”
So, could you clarify?
Your interpretation of “inversion” is correct. The aim is to find statements such that if told P, you say “yes, that’s what I would have expected”, but that you have the same reaction if instead you’re told not-P. See the linked post “Hindsight devalues science” for why such statements exist and why he’s looking for examples of them.