Bayesianism (Subjective or Objective)

I’m read­ing a pa­per called ‘Rea­son­able Doubt and Pre­sum­tion of In­no­cence: The Case of the Bayesian Juror’ for a Physics/​Policy course I’m tak­ing, and am a bit con­fused by some­thing in it. Note here that I’m quite new to Bayesi­anism and do not claim to un­der­stand in en­tirity how it all works.

The claim made is that in pure Bayesi­anism, all prob­a­bil­ities are sub­jec­tive (a prob­a­bil­ity of *you*). As I had un­der­stood from ini­tial read­ings on Bayesi­anism, it is sup­posed to be en­tirely ob­jec­tive (ie you look at the thing you want to de­ter­mine the prob­a­bil­ity of, you look at the ev­i­dence you have available, and you thusly de­ter­mine the prob­a­bil­ity of the thing). As I un­der­stand it, this makes Bayesi­anism ob­jec­tive, at least within the scope of the Bayesian’s knowl­edge.

Is my un­der­stand­ing wrong some­where? Could some kind and en­light­ened souls please ex­plain this to me?

No nominations.
No reviews.