Changes

no edit summary
Line 4: Line 4:     
[[File:Spasmo_emimasticatorio_JJ.jpg|alt=|left|250x250px]]
 
[[File:Spasmo_emimasticatorio_JJ.jpg|alt=|left|250x250px]]
In this chapter, we will discuss the logic of language coupled with mathematical probability. We have seen that [[The logic of classical language|classical logic]] alone is insufficient to determine accurate diagnoses; hence, a conceptual and formal overview is given on why probability can be very useful. Providing illustrations of instances of clinical cases, we will see how the logic of probabilistic language is able to provide us a differential diagnosis in a ‘good enough’ way.  
+
In this chapter, we will discuss the logic of language coupled with mathematical probability. We have seen that [[The logic of classical language|classical logic]] alone is insufficient to determine accurate diagnoses; hence, a conceptual and formal overview is given on why probability can be very useful. Providing illustrations of instances of clinical cases, we will see how the logic of probabilistic language is able to provide us a differential diagnosis in a ‘good enough’ way. The conclusion is that it is possible to demonstrate that, even with the addition of probabilistic reasoning alone, it is not possible to determine exact diagnoses, so other enrichments are being sought for our language.  
 
  −
{{qnq|The conclusion is that it is possible to demonstrate that, even with the addition of probabilistic reasoning alone, it is not possible to determine exact diagnoses, so other enrichments are being sought for our language.}}
      
{{ArtBy|
 
{{ArtBy|
Line 69: Line 67:  
Without a doubt the term ‘subjective’ scares many, especially those who intend to practice science by pursuing the healthy ideal of ‘objectivity’, as this term is perceived by common sense. It is, therefore, appropriate to make some clarifications on the use of this term in this context:   
 
Without a doubt the term ‘subjective’ scares many, especially those who intend to practice science by pursuing the healthy ideal of ‘objectivity’, as this term is perceived by common sense. It is, therefore, appropriate to make some clarifications on the use of this term in this context:   
   −
*‘Subjective’ indicates that the probability assessment depends on the information status of the individual who performs it.  
+
*‘Subjective’ indicates that the probability assessment depends on the information status of the individual who performs it.
   −
*‘Subjective’ does not mean arbitrary.  
+
*‘Subjective’ does not mean arbitrary.
    
The so-called ‘objectivity’, as perceived by those outside scientific research, is defined when a community of rational beings shares the same state of information. But even in this case, one should speak more properly of ‘intersubjectivity’ (i.e. the sharing, by a group, of subjective opinions).  
 
The so-called ‘objectivity’, as perceived by those outside scientific research, is defined when a community of rational beings shares the same state of information. But even in this case, one should speak more properly of ‘intersubjectivity’ (i.e. the sharing, by a group, of subjective opinions).  
Line 110: Line 108:  
#The probability that Mary Poppins has TMDs is 0.15 (quantitative term, relative to the population).
 
#The probability that Mary Poppins has TMDs is 0.15 (quantitative term, relative to the population).
   −
=== Subjective probability ===
+
===Subjective probability===
    
In a context of human subjective uncertainty, the probabilistic, qualitative, comparative and/or quantitative data can be interpreted as a measure of subjective uncertainty by the clinician, in order to make the 'states of conviction' numerically representable.
 
In a context of human subjective uncertainty, the probabilistic, qualitative, comparative and/or quantitative data can be interpreted as a measure of subjective uncertainty by the clinician, in order to make the 'states of conviction' numerically representable.
Line 116: Line 114:  
For example, saying that "the probability that Mary Poppins is affected by TMDs is 0.15 of the cases" is the same as saying "in the measure of 15%, I believe that Mary Poppins is affected by TMDs"; which means that the degree of conviction is the degree of subjective probability.
 
For example, saying that "the probability that Mary Poppins is affected by TMDs is 0.15 of the cases" is the same as saying "in the measure of 15%, I believe that Mary Poppins is affected by TMDs"; which means that the degree of conviction is the degree of subjective probability.
   −
=== Objective probability ===
+
===Objective probability===
    
On the other hand, events and random processes cannot be described by deterministic processes in the form 'if A then B'. Statistics are used to quantify the frequency of association between A and B and to represent the relationships between them as a degree of probability that introduces the degree of objective probability.  
 
On the other hand, events and random processes cannot be described by deterministic processes in the form 'if A then B'. Statistics are used to quantify the frequency of association between A and B and to represent the relationships between them as a degree of probability that introduces the degree of objective probability.  
Line 198: Line 196:     
====The partition of causal relevance====
 
====The partition of causal relevance====
 +
 
:Always be <math>n</math> the number of people we have to conduct the analyses upon, if we divide (based on certain conditions as explained below) this group into <math>k</math> subsets <math>C_i</math> with <math>i=1,2,\dots,k</math>, a cluster is created that is called a "partition set" <math>\pi</math>:
 
:Always be <math>n</math> the number of people we have to conduct the analyses upon, if we divide (based on certain conditions as explained below) this group into <math>k</math> subsets <math>C_i</math> with <math>i=1,2,\dots,k</math>, a cluster is created that is called a "partition set" <math>\pi</math>:
   Line 385: Line 384:     
In general, we can refer to a logical process in which we examine the following elements:
 
In general, we can refer to a logical process in which we examine the following elements:
 +
 
*an individual: <math>a</math>
 
*an individual: <math>a</math>
 
*its initial data set <math>D=\{\delta_1,.....\delta_n\}</math>
 
*its initial data set <math>D=\{\delta_1,.....\delta_n\}</math>
Editor, Editors, USER, admin, Bureaucrats, Check users, dev, editor, founder, Interface administrators, member, oversight, Suppressors, Administrators, translator
11,492

edits