interesting paper by Gelman and Shalizi on the philosophy of Bayesian methods: http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/published/philosophy.pdf
they argue that the common interpretation of Bayes as updating levels of certainty is flawed, and it’s better seen as Popperian hypothesis generation and testing. crucial to practice is that posteriors should be routinely checked and models constantly changed/replaced, not just updated.
@melissaboiko Interesting. My own take has long been that testing a single hypothesis in Bayes is fairly meaningless, and instead, we should compare different hypotheses on the same evidence.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!