URB #488 §10 established that intuition can confirm a fair coin's 1/2 probability transcendentally, independently of Bayesianism. This understates the TI Sigma position. The stronger claim is this: **the coin's probability IS the way it is entirely detached from Bayesianism — not merely discoverable without it, but ontologically prior to it.** The idea that the fair coin's 1/2 "was Bayesian to begin with" is an illusion — a category error that confuses an ontological fact (the coin's structure) with an epistemological tool (an agent's belief-updating procedure). Beyond this, Bayesianism is not merely pragmatically subordinate to intuition in certain cases. Intuition is the **mechanism** by which truth is identified in EVERY case — including in Bayesian reasoning itself. Every prior, every likelihood judgment, every recognition of a posterior as "correct" is scaffolded by intuitive judgment. Remove the intuition and Bayesianism is a formal machine producing outputs that no one can recognize as true. **Intuition always has the final say at grounding truth.** Bayesianism is useful; it is not foundational.
Brandon Charles Emerick (Tue,) studied this question.