I don't see what these koans have to do with what is being discussed, unless you insist on interpreting my words super-literally.

I think you can always ask a person what they believe a probability to be — Pneumenon

No, that is not a given. Outside of a limited colloquial usage, insisting that any belief can be associated with a probability is characteristic of a particular philosophical position: an epistemic interpretation of probability, and conversely, characterizing confidence with probabilities. (This I earlier labelled as Bayesianism, although this is not entirely accurate.) This is a popular enough view, but it is not universally shared. Some will say that talking about "degree of belief" or characterizing it with a scalar metric is incorrect some or all of the time, or that probability specifically is ill-suited for the task. Some (e.g. likelihoodists) will say that probability is fine for e.g. evaluating the support that beliefs derive from a particular piece of evidence, but not for expressing one's total confidence in a proposition.

I don't see what these koans have to do with what is being discussed, unless you insist on interpreting my words super-literally. — SophistiCat

Okay, let's try it again.

A belief about a probability is not identical to a probability. Kind of like how a movie about you is not you. I have beliefs about the Milky Way, but my beliefs are not identical to the Milky Way. A biography of Otto von Bismarck is not the same thing as Otto von Bismarck, because he's a person, not a book.

This isn't a "koan." Insisting that this is somehow cryptic or hard to grasp is disingenuous in the extreme. This distinction is literally on the same level as telling colors and shapes apart and being able to count. So, if you can't grasp it after this, then I'm done.

No, that is not a given.

What is the probability that it's not a given?

You appear to be confusing "I can always ask about probability" with "every belief has a probability," which I never said.

This isn't a "koan." Insisting that this is somehow cryptic or hard to grasp is disingenuous in the extreme. — Pneumenon

It's not cryptic, it's banal.

You appear to be confusing "I can always ask about probability" with "every belief has a probability," which I never said. — Pneumenon

Of course you did. Reread your OP. The only out that you leave is not knowing the probability, while presumably accepting the question as legitimate (and even that you appear to regard as dubious). Now a thoroughgoing Bayesian in Isaak's vein would insist that you do know, even if you are not conscious of your knowledge at every instance. But like I said, these controversies are still located within the broad epistemological framework (sometimes informally referred to as Bayesianism) that associates probabilities with beliefs more or less tightly.

A belief about a probability is not identical to a probability. — Pneumenon

A documentary about documentaries is also a documentary. A poem about poetry is also a piece of poetry. A belief about a belief is nonetheless a belief. Something being about something else doesn't act as a universal argument that it is not also a type of the thing it is about.

So associating beliefs with a 'disposition to act as if', and associating a 'disposition to act as if' with probability (basic Bayesian position) is not undermined by the argument that sometimes things which are about things are not an example of the thing which they're about. Because sometimes they are.

Of course you did. Reread your OP. — SophistiCat

Well, no. "I believe the probability is 50/50." This statement is not a probability. You'd have to be pretty dense to confuse those two.

Anyway, either you won't or can't figure this out, so I'm done. Have a nice day.

Well, no. "I believe the probability is 50/50." This statement is not a probability — Pneumenon

I give up. Either you are trolling me or you really are that dense - either way, there is no sense in going on.