[lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)

From: "John McCreery" <john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx>
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 15:53:27 +0900

On 11/24/06, Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

______

You are given a proposition: "All swans are white".

You are given three boxes to test the proposition.

You open Box 1: in it is a white swan.

Box 2: is empty.

Box 3: you are not allowed to open. Until, that is, you have
found a way to say _as a probability_ what should _probably_
be in the box.


As any decent statistician will tell you two observations are far too
small a sample to say anything about the probability of a third.

John

--
John McCreery
The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN
http://www.wordworks.jp/

US CITIZEN ABROAD?
YOU'RE THE DECIDER!
Register to Vote in '06 Elections
www.VoteFromAbroad.org
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Follow-Ups:

[lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
From: Andreas Ramos

References:
- [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
  - From: Donal McEvoy
- [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
  - From: Eric Yost

[lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)

Other related posts: