There is no consensus on what the consensus is, or on how to do epistemology generally. There is no separate standpoint on the sum total of topics that academics discuss from which it can be evaluated. This meta-convoluted recursion is why you can’t apply one-size-fits-all mechnaical solutions like Bayes. See Chapman on Bayes.
If I get new information I should update on that information using Bayes. If the consensus says it’s (probably) not raining and I look outside and see rain, I update or I’m being insane
You can’t infer from simple cases to complex ones.
People can and do incorporate fundamentally different ideas into their world models every day.
That’s not evidence that it’s being done with Bayes.
There is no consensus on what the consensus is, or on how to do epistemology generally. There is no separate standpoint on the sum total of topics that academics discuss from which it can be evaluated. This meta-convoluted recursion is why you can’t apply one-size-fits-all mechnaical solutions like Bayes. See Chapman on Bayes.
You can’t infer from simple cases to complex ones.
That’s not evidence that it’s being done with Bayes.