[extropy-chat] Indifference (was Coin Flip Paradox)
gts_2000 at yahoo.com
Mon Feb 5 22:15:38 UTC 2007
A person interested in this subject wrote to me in private e-mail,
suggesting that I should elaborate and clarify my meaning about a certain
sentence I wrote here.
I'm embarrassed because English is my first language and I have no excuse
for not communicating my meanings clearly. I'm sorry if my meanings are so
unclear. If they are unclear then I'm grateful to the person who pointed
The dubious passage of mine was this one:
"...the frequency theory is an objectivist, non-epistemic account of
probability in which the epistemic principle of indifference is irrelevant
I was responding here to Stu's argument that the principle of indifference
is somehow provable according to frequentist rationale. I maintain it is
On the frequency theory of probability, probabilities are not in any way
subjective judgments. They are instead properties of the objective world.
They exist "out there" in the supposed world of objective physical
reality, as opposed to "in here" in the subjective world of the mind.
The principle of indifference implies an epistemic (subjective) idea of
probability. I think it is impossible to prove the veracity of the
principle of indifference given the objectivist assumptions of frequentism.
This is why I wrote that the frequency theory is an objectivist,
non-epistemic account of probability in which the epistemic
(non-objectivist) principle of indifference is irrelevant and nonsensical.
Under frequentism I think the principle of indifference is neither true
nor false. I think it is nonsensical. My apologies if that idea is not
More information about the extropy-chat