Posted: Feb 02, 2012 4:28 pm
proudfootz wrote:TheOneTrueZeke wrote:proudfootz wrote:
All I hear is non-historians saying it solves nothing.
Why would I take an interest in so much hand-wringing by people outside the discipline?
Why would you spend so much time posting in a place that affords you no possibility of interest?
You tell me because evidently you do take an interest.
What do you mean? Plenty of people on this forum aren't threatened by historians discussing historical method.
That's a non-sequitur. Try reading the post again.
No, he's trained as a historian. Which is why I think his take on solving problems involving historical method might be worthwhile.
Which gives him exactly fuck all insight into the Bayes Theorem which, last I heard, is a theorem of statistics and not history.
Hoist by your own petard!