Bayes' rule: A powerful thinking paradigm | Julia Galef
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 сен 2024
- Think via Bayes’ rule to become more rational and less brainwashed.
❍ Subscribe to The Well on RUclips: bit.ly/welcome...
❍ Up next, There are 8 classes of intelligence. Which are you?: • There are 8 classes of...
Bayes’ Rule is a powerful way to think about evidence, says Julia Galef, co-founder of the Center for Applied Rationality.
Most of us have preexisting beliefs that we stick to firmly, unless we have a breakthrough-that is, we encounter evidence that is so overwhelmingly inconsistent with our beliefs that it forces us to change our minds and adopt a new theory. But even then, we don’t always change our minds.
Growing aware of Bayes’ rule produces powerful, fundamental changes to your thinking. Bayesian thinkers view their beliefs as grayscale; they’re not black and white. You can have “levels of confidence” in ideas that change over time, rather than wholesale subscriptions to ideas that never change.
Read the full video transcript: bigthink.com/t...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
❍ About The Well ❍
Do we inhabit a multiverse? Do we have free will? What is love? Is evolution directional? There are no simple answers to life’s biggest questions, and that’s why they’re the questions occupying the world’s brightest minds.
So what do they think?
How is the power of science advancing understanding? How are philosophers and theologians tackling these fascinating questions?
Let’s dive into The Well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join The Well on your favorite platforms:
❍ Facebook: bit.ly/thewellFB
❍ Instagram: bit.ly/thewellIG
![Eminem - Like My Shit [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vx_IMvFkrfA/mqdefault.jpg)
Bayesian thinking is also a great mindset tool for counterfactual reasoning and critical thinking. I encountered the theorem almost 30 years ago, and it changed my life completely. Who I am today it's also because of that.
Fortunately RUclips recommended a video of Julia explaining Bayes’ rules directly beneath this one.
Ah I had to scroll down a little, but then I found a TED talk by her, perhaps that’s the one you’re referring to. I’ll check it out, thanks!
I'm sure she spoke much longer than the final edit. My guess is that the editor didn't understand and so left out key parts of the presentation.
This is just a short part of a longer piece isn't it?
@@Catlily5 how do u know?
@@mihailmilev9909I think she spoke longer but I don't know for sure. That is why I am asking.
She noted "updating." incorporating new information, and "gray-scale," level of confidence. Two key ideas of Bayes.
Thats basically how i think everyday.
Life made me do it.
I just finished reading, "The Scout Mindset" two days ago. I remember taking a class Math 505: Introduction To Probability at the U. of Utah in the summer of 1980. We spent a lot of time studying Bayes Rule and its implications but it wasn't until about 12 years after that, that I discovered how controversial it is. Are you working n another book? Here's a potential title:
How to Win Every Argument by Ignoring Facts: A Masterclass in Stubbornness
Would be great if she also expalined what bayes rule is
Using the context of this video, it's basically the idea that you need to intentionally adjust your beliefs to more confident or less confident when you encounter new evidence. Crucially, you need to adjust towards the strength of the evidence, not towards 100 or 0. For example, if your belief in something is 50/50 and you find evidence that implies something has around 70% chance of being true you would adjust to 60% not to 70%.
@@GBM0311 so basically a bunch of random bullshit whatever
@@grand3640 wut
@@grand3640 thats not very bayesian bro
**explained.
I think she is proposing to adopt a way of thinking that your existing beliefs may be wrong. That way you will not look at new information through the lens of your existing beliefs but rather for what it is.
If anyone else than me is wondering, his name is Thomas Bayes and the rule is a statistical one.
Vertasium had a good video on this too.
it was the first video recommended when you played this video, right? I am wondering how the algorthim can be so smart?
@@spiderlandd2 it was not, but maybe after my comment it added it. I saw the vertasium one a while back and remembered the general idea.
Man I was thinking I must be too stupid to get it lol but the I checked the comments and saw that other people were also confused. She didn’t explain the theory!!!
Were Italian Americans and Germsn Americans also interned during WWII?
Think more the hardest way as wise as possible with this particular video since 3 weeks ago...
Vs
Think more the hardest way yet I shouldn't be repeatedly framed like I know nothing
Qualify everything!
Either I completely missed the point of this video or there wasn't one.
There were no WMD
Here is a video of her talking about it more fully. ruclips.net/video/BrK7X_XlGB8/видео.html
Is Bayes’ Rule sufficient for authorities to refuse to examine records available to them that would resolve the claimant’s statement?
Think, ‘He couldn’t possibly be a pedophile, he’s a Catholic Priest’, which put an end to the hopes of many for justice and to their belief in God.
No by bayes rule I guess you'd personally pay more attention to those guys given their track record
There is a trick on Bayesian thinking that can be tricky. The governing of prior probability. Putting simply, if I consider only the evidence that supports my hypothesis, then the Bayes rule will confirm my initial hypothesis. It's called the Bayes Trap. But if you know it, then you can counter fight and adjust. Lawyer should present the evidence to balance the confirmation bias of authorities or change the ruling authority taking the case to another court.
I like the sentiment, just don't like the 'provably the best way' (1:10)... because no, it isn't proven. we've just seen a lot of data that it is effective. to say it is 'provably the BEST' is to literally disregard the premise behind it.
Is this the entire video?
Huh?
Is this the trailer lmao
Click bait
I have a crush on her❤️❤️
I still don't understand why you erasing my latest comments? I still haven't understand how you did this to me...I'm not hurt but I'm angered
❤
Exercise those thumbs and look it up… DYOR!
this is so true 😂😢😮
Scratches
If Jordan Peterson were a Woman:
Hell no ❌
Peterson is a confused unit trying to cure his psychosis by talks to the public.
In what way?
Equally gibberish
What qualifies THIS entertainer (Julia Galef) to decide what is "rational" or "intelligent" or not? Sorry, but being an entertainer and being given free media platform does NOT qualify her as intelligent or rational. Also, show us how to get governments to overcome sunk cost fallacies. Then people will listen to you & take you seriously. Until then, no.
rationalisation explain by a woman.
lol