To be clear, in terms of 'prognostication', I consider it 'likely' but not 'almost certain' or 'certain' that Trump will in fact be seated, after legal challenges and an EC vote.
But any prediction about the future is a *Hypothesis* that requires *Evdence* for it, and a plausible train of *Events*.
Remember our notation at this site[1] -- H for hypothesis, E for events, E* for Evidence, all with probabilities attached.
Remember our notation at this site[1] -- H for hypothesis, E for events, E* for Evidence, all with probabilities attached.
[1]: Notation from Tecuci et al, _Intelligence Analysis as Discovery of Evidence, Hypotheses, and Arguments_
Discussed at the forum:
Previous Dissent • Cognitive Assistants in Intelligence Analysis
Discussed at the forum:
Previous Dissent • Cognitive Assistants in Intelligence Analysis
Backing up a claim H requires identifying the E's that will lead to that outcome, then the E* items supporting that conclusion.
Persons willing to consider Evidence, Events, Hypotheses, are of course entitled to see the Argument favouring the Hypothesis.
Persons willing to consider Evidence, Events, Hypotheses, are of course entitled to see the Argument favouring the Hypothesis.
/we/ Patriots need to get used to an Intelligence gathering, planning, operations, evaluation cycle of some sort.
Or we'll end up like the GOP.
You know, #losers
Or we'll end up like the GOP.
You know, #losers
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
