I see that it's been asked to allow questions to be migrated to any SE network, and I don't necessarily agree (complete red-herring topics should be closed-closed, not migrated, fewer network options will help expedite that process).

However, philosophy addresses many aspects of probability, interpretation of probability, and especially the seemingly endless banter about Bayesian versus frequentist probability. Operational questions about how to accurately calculate and report probabilities, estimates, and inference in each paradigm is warranted. But very often, things are spun around into the basic misconception of what probability is (in either context). As much as we, as statisticians, love that discussion, I don't think it actually contributes much to our site to have to explicate the finer points of this as often as it comes up.

Just as there are grey areas with whether certain questions should be migrated to StackOverflow and Mathematics, I think the community can decide and help clean up the questions a little bit.

| |

During the last six months we have migrated 400 posts and none of them have gone to the Philosophy site. This is not due to lack of awareness or inability to do so: moderators review close votes and can perform migrations to any SE site. On that basis alone there appears to be no need for this feature.

The meaning and interpretation of the terms and concepts we use are of interest to this community and are on topic here. Our presumption should be that when the original poster elects to ask their question here, then they want the reaction of a community of statisticians and data analysts rather than the advice of a philosophical community.

On the rare occasion anyone happens to find a thread that looks like it would be better suited for the Philosophy site, please just flag it for moderator attention.

| |
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ FWIW, I am sympathetic to the sentiments expressed in this question. I hold a degree in philosophy. $\endgroup$ – whuber Mar 25 '14 at 20:15
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thanks for the response. Maybe I'm just an inexperienced user. When I see a post that's off-topic, I vote to close it, then I navigate to "off-topic" where I am given the option to select one of three related SE networks: Math, Computer Science, and Meta. I think that in part explains the lack of votes to close questions suited for philosophy (my own and others). However, I can agree with the need to solicit opinions of statisticians. $\endgroup$ – AdamO Mar 25 '14 at 20:51
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ It's my impression that much (quasi)philosophical discussion of Bayesian vs frequentist statistics is within blogs, e.g. the Gelman blog, Deborah Mayo's blog. But I really would not see that as off-topic here, so long as it fit the question and answer format. $\endgroup$ – Nick Cox Mar 25 '14 at 20:57

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .