I was prompted by yet another pompous idiot w/ an MBA espousing statistics to argue something in a particular case better handled by contigency planning...This followed yet another incident from last night where a friend made an argument from statistics about a particular chess position.
So, I am wondering, if I am actually the one off base in these circumstances.
It goes as follows:
P1: p% of As are Bs.
P2: X is an A
----------------------------------, Therefore, I believe
C1: X is a B
Consider not that there may or may not be another argument that concludes with
!C1: X is not a B.
- At what p does this argument a strong one for you (in that it begins to convince you)?
- What forms of arguments that conclude that X is not B, would change your mind in this case?
- At what p, would you stop looking for good arguments that X is not B?
Also as background, and to provide more rich context, consider two popular, and both admittedly flawed, philosophical views of probability:
Frequentists and Bayesians
A more in depth article (a pdf).