Two statisticians revisited

Two years ago, I described walking, each week, past the tombs of Thomas Bayes and Richard Price in the nonconformist burial ground at Bunhill Fields in London, and wondered about the extent to which Bayes’ Theorem, or its interpretation as the foundation of Bayesian statistics, was actually due to Price.

The current issue of Significance contains an article by Martyn Hooper on precisely this topic. Read it!

Hooper ends by quoting from the book by S. B. McGrayne on Bayes’ Theorem:

By modern standards, we should refer to the Bayes–Price rule. Price discovered Bayes’ work, recognized its importance, corrected it, contributed to the article, and found a use for it [estimating the probability of the existence of God]. The modern convention of employing Bayes’ name alone is unfair but so entrenched that anything else makes little sense.

Advertisements

About Peter Cameron

I count all the things that need to be counted.
This entry was posted in history and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Two statisticians revisited

  1. Nikhil Agrawal says:

    awesome article to read.

  2. Today, there are workmen doing maintenance on Richard Price’s tomb in Bunhill Fields.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s