Congrats on 3 years of great thinking and writing.
I am not sure about translating these concepts into a mathematical scale. It does have illustrative value. It might also be an interesting base for mapping the natural distribution of thinking within the population. But, for me, it suggests a precision in the boundaries of each category that may not really exist. And, while your concepts are about knowledge writ large, my sense is that people will tend to particularise and bend your intended meaning.
My feeling is that the concept of credence provides a wonderful potential bridge between your overall philosophical idea of epistemic humility and the practical world of decisions and actions. The different 'attitudes' to knowledge (humility, certainty etc) result in people applying different (overlapping) credence scales in practice. Trying to collapse these into a single scale of credence could neuter the nuance this brings.
Congrats on 3 years of great thinking and writing.
I am not sure about translating these concepts into a mathematical scale. It does have illustrative value. It might also be an interesting base for mapping the natural distribution of thinking within the population. But, for me, it suggests a precision in the boundaries of each category that may not really exist. And, while your concepts are about knowledge writ large, my sense is that people will tend to particularise and bend your intended meaning.
My feeling is that the concept of credence provides a wonderful potential bridge between your overall philosophical idea of epistemic humility and the practical world of decisions and actions. The different 'attitudes' to knowledge (humility, certainty etc) result in people applying different (overlapping) credence scales in practice. Trying to collapse these into a single scale of credence could neuter the nuance this brings.