[lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- From: "Andreas Ramos" <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 00:04:42 -0800
Are these African swans or European swans?
yrs,
andreas
www.andreas.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "John McCreery" <john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 10:53 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
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
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.14/547 - Release Date: 11/22/2006
------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Phil Enns
- 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)
- From: John McCreery
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
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 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.14/547 - Release Date: 11/22/2006
- [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- From: Phil Enns
- [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)
- From: John McCreery