Sandra on Nostr: I think stacking up a whole chain of these inductive “conclusions” makes the leap ...
I think stacking up a whole chain of these inductive “conclusions” makes the leap from point A to point Z weaker, not stronger. It’s not like a sieve narrowing down tighter and tighter to a truth where some guesses in some steps are OK because they get canceled out by other, better guesses down the line. No no no. Instead, it’s like a branching tree of fuzziness and maybes, and the more branches the wider and wilder the tree and ergo the more of the steps in a chain that are inductive as opposed to deductive, the less sure we can be about the final claim that “with great A, there must also come great Z”.
https://idiomdrottning.org/recursive-appeal-to-probabilityPublished at
2023-12-23 13:30:59Event JSON
{
"id": "b9cc6deca0b2eaee18c02b253ebc156b19405dfb5e6f87575c10c0a673bcc20b",
"pubkey": "812e39027ad08f834ebf921e9174e31fcd8fd161bf7aca8eb0233ab7cdea743a",
"created_at": 1703338259,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"proxy",
"https://idiomdrottning.org/objects/83b47fd5-d249-4ed8-90ab-f15258624577",
"activitypub"
]
],
"content": "I think stacking up a whole chain of these inductive “conclusions” makes the leap from point A to point Z weaker, not stronger. It’s not like a sieve narrowing down tighter and tighter to a truth where some guesses in some steps are OK because they get canceled out by other, better guesses down the line. No no no. Instead, it’s like a branching tree of fuzziness and maybes, and the more branches the wider and wilder the tree and ergo the more of the steps in a chain that are inductive as opposed to deductive, the less sure we can be about the final claim that “with great A, there must also come great Z”.\n\nhttps://idiomdrottning.org/recursive-appeal-to-probability",
"sig": "e609421ede3366920e8ba7fbde283cea87fb4c54e5d6f6ae906f686a4545e151829d897009db88f18edad1fa6aedfbfaf641550bf0b12ec1f5732a56dc3dd9fa"
}
