Thinking About Probability #2

I left off my previous post with Hume’s problem of induction and a way forward coming from Uwe Saint-Mont.

For this post, I was originally planning to do a deep dive on the structure of logic and epistemic uncertainty to help frame future discussions. Fortunately Sean McLure has already done a better job than I could ever do in a recent series on his podcast, NonTrivial.

I highly recommend the listen as a primer for logical analysis to help understand where logic can be useful and where risk management becomes a better proxy, particularly in complex situations.

He spends a lot of time talking about inductive logic and Popperian falsification, which I think will become foundational as this probability series progresses.

Here is the link to the first part of the Facts and Logic Series on NonTrivial:

Here is a link to Sean’s comprehensive list of logical fallacies:

Next post I’ll get back to probability starting with the Uwe Saint-Mont paper.

Critical Thinking (Outline)

Chris Kresser and James Wilks recently debated several points from James Cameron’s film The Game Changers. It was a fascinating dialogue between the two men on the contentious topic of nutrition, where James argues for a vegan diet and Chris argues for an omnivorous diet.

On display were a variety of debate and political oration techniques as the two sides picked apart each other’s arguments. Both sides leveraged nutritional research to support their arguments and I found the conversation to be incredibly valuable. While there are flaws in the arguments presented by both sides, I find this type of long-form public debate to be exceedingly rare and both highly entertaining and enlightening. We need more of this!

The show inspired me to do a deep dive on critical thinking. In particular, I will be developing a series of articles around heuristics, fallacies and biases as outlined below with Wikipedia links for easy reference.