Minor note: I think it’s kinda inelegant that your operationalization depends on the kinds of question-answer pairs humans consider rather than asserting something about the counterfactual where you consider an arbitrary question-answer pair for an hour.
Hmm I’m not sure I understand the inelegance remark, but I do want to distinguish between something like --
welp I considered scientific hypothesis for a while and concluded it was a 10^-9 probability, then light evidence got me to update towards it being 10^-2, then somebody offered an argument and I went down to 10^-8
which, while not technically excluded by the laws of probability, sure seems wild if my beliefs are anything even approximately approaching a martingale -- from a situation like
hmm surely the probability of meeting a new person in any given microsecond is vanishingly low, what are the odds?
I want to be careful to not borrow the credulity from the second case (a situation that is natural, normal, commonplace under most formulations) and apply to the first.
Minor note: I think it’s kinda inelegant that your operationalization depends on the kinds of question-answer pairs humans consider rather than asserting something about the counterfactual where you consider an arbitrary question-answer pair for an hour.
Hmm I’m not sure I understand the inelegance remark, but I do want to distinguish between something like --
which, while not technically excluded by the laws of probability, sure seems wild if my beliefs are anything even approximately approaching a martingale -- from a situation like
I want to be careful to not borrow the credulity from the second case (a situation that is natural, normal, commonplace under most formulations) and apply to the first.