**Rationalists believe you arrive at priors through a logical analysis; in a novel situation, map out the potentialities and reason what follows necessarily from the knowns.**
**Empiricists believe you arrive at priors through experience. When facing the unknown, search experience for appropriate comparisons and adjust confidence based on how well examples fit.**
This is why we fired Philosophers as decisions makers. Together in this context this is pure false dilemma. We need both -- in various amounts, at various times, and in various spaces -- to establish, refine, and build more "true" priors.
Agreed, in practice, everyone has to be both an Empiricist Rationalist/Logicist. Over history, these approaches have become more integrated, and now the debate is over what the appropriate reference class is for determining base rates and how you make that determination.
**Rationalists believe you arrive at priors through a logical analysis; in a novel situation, map out the potentialities and reason what follows necessarily from the knowns.**
**Empiricists believe you arrive at priors through experience. When facing the unknown, search experience for appropriate comparisons and adjust confidence based on how well examples fit.**
This is why we fired Philosophers as decisions makers. Together in this context this is pure false dilemma. We need both -- in various amounts, at various times, and in various spaces -- to establish, refine, and build more "true" priors.
Agreed, in practice, everyone has to be both an Empiricist Rationalist/Logicist. Over history, these approaches have become more integrated, and now the debate is over what the appropriate reference class is for determining base rates and how you make that determination.