Aspiring statistician and meta-researcher, sailor and activists.
#PhilosophyofScience
#OpenScience
#Uncertanity
Paweł Lenartowicz
Loading...
My priors are: the bigger the claim in the title, the weaker the arguments.
BTW. I'm quite skeptical toward Bayesian Estimation as most common replacement for frequentist statistics, but come on!
"when Trump announced the idea of tariffs to address the trade deficit... every economist around the country said: That's a very bad idea, that won't work....
If you look at 2025 as a whole, we have basically the same trade deficit...
So I'm going to score this one for the economist, mate."
I rarely get this angry, but this pisses me off.
Just because a bunch of fools started calling what they do "cognitive science" when it isn't science, doesn't mean that what we do as cognitive scientists isn't.
Go read Von Eckhardt's "What is cognitive science?" if you doubt me.
Video
The mathematical techniques are not rigorous btw
In a sense, we have completely replaced a lot of scientific processes with the power of statistical methodology and essentially outsourced part of our scientific thinking and practice to statistical inference. And now we're confronted with the risk of the same thing happening with AI.
