Is there a name for the following pattern?
Argument or just noticing confusion
“He looks way too confident, he’s probably better at the field or has significant information”
Catastrophic failure more or less matching my predictions
I seem to run into this a lot lately, but the alternative of assuming I’m correct seems even worse. I’m also often not in a position to ask about the source of their confidence.
If he got his opinion by updating it constantly and is willing to update it in the other direction given further evidence, yes. What he actually ends up doing with it is another matter entirely. I wouldn’t expect a Bayesian redneck to join the KKK, for example.
I’d think she’s either committing the fallacy of trusting statistics to exactly predict the individual case, or simply not doing proper cost analysis. Even if the statistics say there are no unsolved crimes and none of the crimes are committed by Asians, the expected negative utility of running into the first Asian criminal in history should outweigh the inconvenience of avoiding one person on an otherwise empty street.