MONTHLY MEMORY LANE: 3 years ago: January 2012. I mark in red three posts that seem most apt for general background on key issues in this blog.
- (1/3) Model Validation and the LLP-(Long Playing Vinyl Record)
- (1/8) Don’t Birnbaumize that Experiment my Friend*
- (1/10) Bad-Faith Assertions of Conflicts of Interest?*
- (1/13) U-PHIL: “So you want to do a philosophical analysis?”
- (1/14) “You May Believe You are a Bayesian But You Are Probably Wrong” (Extract from Senn RMM article)
- (1/15) U-Phil Mayo Philosophizes on Stephen Senn(0): “How Can We Culivate Senn’s-Ability?”
- (1/17) “Philosophy of Statistics”: Nelder on Lindley
- (1/19) RMM-6 Special Volume on Stat Sci Meets Phil Sci (Sprenger)
- (1/22) U-Phil: Stephen Senn (1): C. Robert, A. Jaffe, and Mayo (brief remarks)
- (1/23) U-Phil: Stephen Senn (2): Andrew Gelman
- (1/24) U-Phil (3): Stephen Senn on Stephen Senn!
- (1/26) Updating & Downdating: One of the Pieces to Pick up
- (1/29) No-Pain Philosophy: Skepticism, Rationality, Popper, and All That: First of 3 Parts
This new, once-a-month, feature began at the blog’s 3-year anniversary in Sept, 2014. I will count U-Phil’s on a single paper as one of the three I highlight (else I’d have to choose between them). I will comment on 3-year old posts from time to time.
This Memory Lane needs a bit of explanation. This blog began largely as a forum to discuss a set of contributions from a conference I organized (with A. Spanos and J. Miller*) “Statistical Science and Philosophy of Science: Where Do (Should) They meet?”at the London School of Economics, Center for the Philosophy of Natural and Social Science, CPNSS, in June 2010 (where I am a visitor). Additional papers grew out of conversations initiated soon after (with Andrew Gelman and Larry Wasserman). The conference site is here. My reflections in this general arena (Sept. 26, 2012) are here.
As articles appeared in a special topic of the on-line journal, Rationality, Markets and Morals (RMM), edited by Max Albert[i]—also a conference participant —I would announce an open invitation to readers to take a couple of weeks to write an extended comment. Each “U-Phil”–which stands for “U philosophize”- was a contribution to this activity. I plan to go back to that exercise at some point. Generally I would give a “deconstruction” of the paper first, followed by U-Phils, and then the author gave responses to U-Phils and me as they wished. You can readily search this blog for all the U-Phils and deconstructions**.
I was also keeping a list of issues that we either haven’t taken up, or need to return to. One example here is: Bayesian updating and down dating. Further notes about the origins of this blog are here. I recommend everyone reread Senn’s paper.**
For newcomers, here’s your chance to catch-up; for old timers,this is philosophy: rereading is essential!
[i] Along with Hartmut Kliemt and Bernd Lahno.
*For a full list of collaborators, sponsors, logisticians, and related collaborations, see the conference page. The full list of speakers is found there as well.
**The U-Phil exchange between Mayo and Senn was published in the same special topic of RIMM. But I still wish to know how we can cultivate “Senn’s-ability.” We could continue that activity as well, perhaps.
Previous 3 YEAR MEMORY LANES: