Isn't the following proposition true: it is possible to calculate the probable benefits of acquiring unknown evidence only if one can make a judgment in advance that the unknown evidence will (certainly or probably) be pertinent to a hypothesis or hypotheses of interest; and, if so, isn't it true that to the extent newly-acquired evidence causes unanticipated and unforeseeable mutations in hypotheses of interest, to that extent it is difficult ("impossible"?) to calculate -- or, even, intuit -- the probable benefits of evidence and information that one does not yet have?
I wonder if my comments about Posner's theory of "search" should be directed at some version of what is sometimes called "value of information" theory. Can someone enlighten me on this point?
No comments:
Post a Comment