Timeline for Do some Bayesians assume that true values of parameters do not exist?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 7, 2019 at 3:01 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackStats/status/1203147545985331200 | ||
| Dec 7, 2019 at 0:36 | answer | added | AdamO | timeline score: 2 | |
| Dec 6, 2019 at 14:12 | comment | added | Richard Hardy | A helpful comment by @SextusEmpiricus on the previous thread: To me the questions seems clear now (although the dichtomous name calling of people like either being 'Bayesian' or 'frequentists' is a bit offensive, but so be it). In the question mentioned by Sycorax it is asked whether a 'Bayesian' would "acknowledge that there is one true fixed parameter". The answer is 'typically yes' or (it is irrelevant for Bayesian statistics). But such answers generate new questions "Are there any statisticians to which the answer 'no' applies and that do reject fixed parameters?. | |
| Dec 6, 2019 at 14:11 | comment | added | Richard Hardy | A helpful comments by @Sycorax on the previous thread: stats.stackexchange.com/questions/83731/… | |
| Dec 6, 2019 at 13:46 | comment | added | BigBendRegion | Why is this limited to Bayesians? A frequentist can as easily say the same thing. After all, the conditional (on the parameters) model is a construct used by both frequentists and Bayesians, and it is rarely (if ever) the precise reality. By analogy, a map is not the actual terrain, as Bayesians and frequentists would agree. | |
| Dec 6, 2019 at 13:27 | comment | added | Xi'an | de Finetti: "Probability does not exist" | |
| Dec 6, 2019 at 12:45 | history | edited | Richard Hardy | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title
|
| Dec 6, 2019 at 12:40 | comment | added | Richard Hardy | When the question Do some Bayesians assume that true values of parameters do not exist? got closed, the comment said Update the question so it focuses on one problem only. This will help others answer the question. You can edit the question or post a new one. I am posting a new one as suggested. (Given the current situation with moderator activity, the other option might take a long time to take effect. And I do see some current interest from other users.) Judging by the comments under the former question, I hope this one should be fine. | |
| Dec 6, 2019 at 12:39 | history | asked | Richard Hardy | CC BY-SA 4.0 |