• epigone@awful.systems
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    first comment,

    If the conventional wisdom is correct, Bayesianism is potentially wrong (it’s not part of the Standard Approach to Life), and [certainly useless] [...]

    what was actually said:

    the abandonment of interpretation in favor of a naïve approach to statistical [analysis] certainly skews the game from the outset in favor of a belief that data is intrinsically quantitative—self-evident, value neutral, and observer-independent. This [belief excludes] the possibilities of conceiving data as qualitative, co-dependently constituted. (Drucker, Johanna. 2011. “Humanities Approaches to Graphical Display.”)

    the latter isn't even claiming that the bayesian (statistical analysis) is "useless" but that it "skews the game [...] in favor of a belief". the very framing is a misconstrual of the nature of the debate.