What does it even mean to live in a Bayesian universe? A universe needs some basic properties to make probabilistic reasoning possible and meaningful. Probabilistic reasoning is only meaningful in deterministic universe if the reasoner is limited, so that there is some Knightian uncertainty. It’s always meaningful in an indeterministic universe if the indeterminism itself follows statistical patterns—otherwise you have possibility without probability. (Complex systems can defy simple statistical patterns, as Pinker notes) Frequentism also requires events to fall into reference classes with n>1 members. That clearly isn’t always—or never—the case in our universe. Bayesian probability is much less demanding.

Which to choose out of frequentism and Bayesianism? Frequentism is always better where you can use it because it is objective. But Bayesianism can be used where frequentism can’t. So the answer is “both”—specifically, use frequentism when you can, and Bayesianism when you can’t.

What does it even mean to live in a Bayesian universe? A universe needs some basic properties to make probabilistic reasoning possible and meaningful. Probabilistic reasoning is only meaningful in deterministic universe if the reasoner is limited, so that there is some Knightian uncertainty. It’s always meaningful in an indeterministic universe if the indeterminism itself follows statistical patterns—otherwise you have possibility without probability. (Complex systems can defy simple statistical patterns, as Pinker notes) Frequentism also requires events to fall into reference classes with n>1 members. That clearly isn’t always—or never—the case in our universe. Bayesian probability is much less demanding.

Which to choose out of frequentism and Bayesianism? Frequentism is always better

where you can use itbecause it is objective. But Bayesianism can be used where frequentism can’t. So the answer is “both”—specifically, use frequentism when you can, and Bayesianism when you can’t.I mean, we’re simplifying reality down to Bayesian networks and scenario trees. And it works. It seems that we can say that the universe is Bayesian.

Bayesianism works up to a point. Frequentism works up to a point. Various other things work.

You haven’t shown that frequentism doesn’t work, or that frequentism and bayesianism are mutually exclusive.

Ok I agree