[jbnicolai]

    "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"

Always resonated with me as a good summary.

Where a (naive) frequentist might assume, for instance, that after a 90% accurate test comes back positive the hypothesis is likely to be true, a Bayesianist would ask how likely it was to be true in the first place; all the test did was make it ten times more likely, which may or may not make it probable.

You may enjoy https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/XTXWPQSEgoMkAupKt/an-intuiti...