David Manheim on Bayesian analysis is the right framewor…

David Manheim

Researcher and LessWrong commenter on probabilistic reasoning and risk

That is, this type of informal Bayesian estimate is useful as part of a ritual for changing your own mind, when done carefully. That requires a significant degree of self-composure, a willingness to change one's mind, and a high degree of justified confidence n your own mastery of unbiased reasoning.

AI Verified source (Feb 19, 2024)

3mo ago

Policy proposals and claims

Bayesian analysis is the right framework for settling the COVID-19 origins question

votes Against

Statement relation verification history AI Verified Report this

AI Verified Relevant: in source context, the quote is specifically about informal Bayesian estimates in the COVID-19 origins debate, and the author says they are only useful for changing one’s own mind, while using them as a public argument is “not how any of this should work.” That makes a stance against the complete statement substantially more likely, even if the exact vote direction belongs to the separate pass. ([lesswrong.com](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/NrKQGyggC7jcersuJ/on-coincidences-and-bayesian-reasoning-as-applied-to-the)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 3mo ago

AI Verified Relevant: in source context, “this type of informal Bayesian estimate” refers to Bayes-factor arguments about COVID-19 origins, and the author says using them as public arguments is “bad epistemic practice” and “fundamentally flawed,” making opposition to the statement substantially more likely even though he allows a limited private use. ([lesswrong.com](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/NrKQGyggC7jcersuJ/on-coincidences-and-bayesian-reasoning-as-applied-to-the)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 3mo ago

Vote inference verification history AI Verified Report this

AI Verified He treats these COVID-origins Bayes-factor exercises as the wrong way to resolve the issue: he says this kind of informal Bayesian estimate is only useful for "changing your own mind" when done carefully, but warns against using it "as an argument at all," calls it "very bad epistemic practice," and says "Here, though, it is presented as an argument, which is not how any of this should work." That supports opposition to Bayesian analysis as the right framework for settling the question, though his criticism is aimed at informal/public Bayes-factor arguments rather than every possible Bayesian method. ([lesswrong.com](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/NrKQGyggC7jcersuJ/on-coincidences-and-bayesian-reasoning-as-applied-to-the)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 3mo ago

AI Verified He only endorses this kind of Bayesian reasoning as a careful private aid for "changing your own mind," while saying its use "as an argument" is "very bad epistemic practice" and "not how any of this should work." That strongly implies opposition to Bayesian analysis as the framework for settling the COVID-19 origins question, even though he allows a narrow personal use. ([lesswrong.com](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/NrKQGyggC7jcersuJ/on-coincidences-and-bayesian-reasoning-as-applied-to-the)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 3mo ago

Quote authenticity verification history

Report this

AI Verified Authentic: the exact text appears on the cited LessWrong URL in a comment by "Davidmanheim" (lines 236-240), and David Manheim later reposted the same text elsewhere as "a comment I made on a lesswrong," linking back to the direct LessWrong comment URL. So the quote is real and attributable to David Manheim; on the source page it appears in the comments, not the body of viking_math's post. ([lesswrong.com](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/NrKQGyggC7jcersuJ/on-coincidences-and-bayesian-reasoning-as-applied-to-the)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 3mo ago

AI Verified Verified: the LessWrong source URL contains this exact text in a comment attributed to Davidmanheim, including the apparent typo in “confidence n your own mastery.” A GreaterWrong mirror of the same thread timestamps that comment to 19 Feb 2024 13:53 UTC, so the stored date is correct; other LessWrong pages render the same author as David Manheim, so the attribution is consistent. ([lesswrong.com](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/NrKQGyggC7jcersuJ/on-coincidences-and-bayesian-reasoning-as-applied-to-the)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 3mo ago

replying to David Manheim

Other opinions from David Manheim

See all

David Manheim votes Against

Bayesian analysis is the right framework for settling the COVID-19 origins question

I think most points here are good points to make, but I also think it's useful as a general caution against this type of exercise being used as an argument at all! So I'd obviously caution against anyone taking your response itself as a reasonable at...

more AI Verified source (Feb 19, 2024)