All learning paths

When intuition surprises you

Start with a familiar puzzle, then learn to ask what information and counting really mean.

  1. Step 1

    Birthday problem

    Count pairs rather than comparing everyone with one person.

    Checkpoint: Are 23 people being compared with one particular birthday?

    No. There are 253 pairs among 23 people. A match anywhere among them is a different event from a match with one specified person.

  2. Step 2

    Events and probability

    Make the possible outcomes explicit before counting them.

    Checkpoint: Why are two dice sums not equally likely?

    Ordered dice pairs are equally likely, but different sums collect different numbers of pairs: one pair gives 2 and six give 7.

  3. Step 3

    Conditioning

    Learn how new information changes the sample space.

    Checkpoint: Which denominator changes after learning the first die is at least 4?

    Keep only the 18 ordered pairs consistent with that information. For a sum at least 10, six qualify, giving 1/3.

  4. Step 4

    Monty Hall

    Apply conditioning to a host who knows where the prize is.

    Checkpoint: What host behavior makes the usual switching result valid?

    The host knows the prize location, always opens an unchosen goat door, and always offers a switch. A different revealing protocol can change the conditional probabilities.

  5. Step 5

    Base rates

    Use actual denominators to interpret a positive test.

    Checkpoint: Why can a rare condition generate many false positive results?

    A small false-positive rate applies to a large unaffected population. Compare true-positive and false-positive counts before interpreting a positive result.

  6. Step 6

    Simpson’s paradox

    Discover how group weights can reverse an aggregate comparison.

    Checkpoint: Can an aggregate improve without either subgroup improving?

    Yes. Shifting population weight toward the higher-rate group changes the weighted average even with unchanged subgroup rates.

After each lesson, try to explain its main result without looking at the formula. Then change one assumption: which part of the answer would change?