Any good book on applied probability (statistics) will discuss the difficulty in applying probability theory which this article depends on. But the issue here is more philosophical or a matter of conceptual analysis - the question of objective existence of something.
Author says, "probability ... is not an objective property of the world, but a construction based on personal or collective judgements". My claim would be that most concepts are like that, but because they, or probability in particular, is a construct, doesn't make it non-objective.
A chair, number 5, color blue, energy, information are constructs that refer to objective properties of the world. "Food" is an objective property of the world, but the article would have it that "food" is non-objective because it's only a mental construct. Does this clarify my initial reaction?
Probability is largely based on combinatorial math, the number of different ways an outcome can possibly occur. So, it is objective that a coin will have a 50/50 chance of landing heads, given a fair coin. So in that sense probability is as objective as anything.
Thank you! I now better see what bothered you about this article which anyhow has the merit of reminding scientists, like me, that the mode of existence of probability is not that clear (at least, at the non-quantum level).
Comments