@DruckerDaniel .. thinking about drafting a thing on patterns for fittingness. Not exactly on the topic, but was motivated by observing that conjunction fails for justification of uncertain emotions (section 6, here https://t.co/2kUYFtUGgb ) and another f
@PabloRedux @jholbo1 @MikeBenchCapon @_primes_ I guess I lost the track of the discussion a bit. But yes, my OP was a genuine question. It seems that there are some structural rational constraints on what emotions we can have at once. I explored that idea
@BobbyAzarian Yes, was thinking that having crazy priors is epistemically bad. Also I was thinking about paradoxes that Bayesian approach face, e.g. the paradox of preface (but also the lottery paradox, wrote something about the latter recently, https://t.
@DruckerDaniel @MetaHumean Yes. But, further distinctions among absolutes: straight requires max standard, bent - min (any amount will do), transparent - probably both min max on Kennedy's framework. My suspicion (I elaborated on it in a paper fwiw), confi
Feeling like you are in two minds every time a lottery is offered to you? Worry no more. No one will trick you into a paradox anymore. Here is how to resist absurd conclusions when reasoning about lotteries and chances of winning. https://t.co/8aAqBfDASA
RT @ALogins: Not really ethics. But it's fun. https://t.co/KgwZuXMvJO
Not really ethics. But it's fun.
Two-state solution to the lottery paradox Artūrs Logins Philosophical Studies https://t.co/Qv0aE4ASgP https://t.co/vqcA2tReUP
There might be a previously unnoticed solution to the Lottery Paradox (is it even probable?). Or so I suggest here: https://t.co/2kUYFtUGgb