399Inductive argument and Baysian statistics
- Mar 3 8:43 AMIt has come to my attention that the form of my recent argument may be
completely foreign to those trained in biblical studies. (As some terms
used by biblical scholars still are to me)
I know biblical students learn inductive argument, but I am now guessing
that Bayesian analysis, or a connection between inductive logic and
probability is not (generally) part of the curriculum.
Am I correct in this?
Bayesian probability is about subjective mental probability assessments
(or better yet the justified certainty a robot or computer correctly
programmed could have about a given truth claim).
Without that background, my recent argument may have been completely
My recent salt argument runs like this -
Produce an inductive argument for a pattern in Mark. Show that my
reading of salt would strengthen that inductive argument.
Form a new completely separate inductive argument for a different
pattern in Mark, again show that my reading of salt would strengthen
that inductive argument.
Repeat as often as possible.
Each time my reading fits and strengthens one of those inductive
arguments, (better than a competing reading), our justified assessment
of the probable truth of the reading must increase.
This is a Bayesian probability argument.
Does this information help anyone understand what I was trying to say?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]