To be clear, something can be ‘substantial/important evidence’ (in a Bayesian sense) even if it causes one to update their credence in something from 1% to 2%.
You mostly use the word ‘indication’ instead of evidence (e.g. “There is significant indication that a third dose of an mRNA vaccine has a good safety profile” and “I agree with them that this indicates a similar safety profile to the first two doses”). I’m not sure what you mean by that word in this context. Can you share with us your credence in the prediction that: [in 5 years it will be widely believed that such a booster shot (taken in July 2021) had a good safety profile] [such a booster shot having a good safety profile]?
To be clear, something can be ‘substantial/important evidence’ (in a Bayesian sense) even if it causes one to update their credence in something from 1% to 2%.
You mostly use the word ‘indication’ instead of evidence (e.g. “There is significant indication that a third dose of an mRNA vaccine has a good safety profile” and “I agree with them that this indicates a similar safety profile to the first two doses”). I’m not sure what you mean by that word in this context. Can you share with us your credence in
the prediction that: [in 5 years it will be widely believed that such a booster shot (taken in July 2021) had a good safety profile][such a booster shot having a good safety profile]?