I agree with Senn’s comments on the impossibility of the de Finetti subjective Bayesian approach. As I wrote in 2008, if you could really construct a subjective prior you believe in, why not just look at the data and write down your subjective posterior. The immense practical difficulties with any serious system of inference render it absurd to think that it would be possible to just write down a probability distribution to represent uncertainty. I wish, however, that Senn would recognize “my” Bayesian approach (which is also that of John Carlin, Hal Stern, Don Rubin, and, I believe, others). De Finetti is no longer around, but we are!
Posts Tagged With: Gelman
U-PHIL: Stephen Senn (2): Andrew Gelman
Categories: Philosophy of Statistics, Statistics, U-Phil
|
Tags: Carlin, de Finetti, Gelman, Rubin, Senn
|
3 Comments

D.G. Mayo
RMM Special Topic
Noteworthy Book Reviews: Ziliac & McCloskey
Recent Posts
- “A sense of security regarding the future of statistical science…” Anon review of Error and Inference
- ‘No-Shame’ Psychics Keep Their Predictions Vague: New Rejected post
- If it’s called the “The High Quality Research Act,” then ….
- Professorships in Scandal?
- Schedule for Ontology & Methodology, 2013
- What should philosophers of science do? (Higgs, statistics, Marilyn)
- Getting Credit (or blame) for Something You Didn’t Do (BP oil spill, comedy hour)
- Blog Contents 2013 (March)
- PhilStock: Applectomy? (rejected post)
- Majority say no to inflight cell phone use, knives, toy bats, bow and arrows, according to survey
Most viewed
- What should philosophers of science do? (Higgs, statistics, Marilyn)
- Does statistics have an ontology? Does it need one? (draft 2)
- "A sense of security regarding the future of statistical science..." Anon review of Error and Inference
- A. Spanos: Egon Pearson’s Neglected Contributions to Statistics
- Dennis Lindley's "Philosophy of Statistics"
- If it's called the "The High Quality Research Act," then ....
- 'No-Shame' Psychics Keep Their Predictions Vague: New Rejected post
- Reposting from Jan 29: No-Pain Philosophy: Skepticism, Rationality, Popper, and All That: The First of 3 Parts
- No-Pain Philosophy: Skepticism, Rationality, Popper and All That (part 2): Duhem’s problem & methodological falsification
- Professorships in Scandal?
