I just checked what you said back then when your reasoning made you to foolishly stick to the fish soup At you said The choice of the fish soup is in concordance with the current article because after seeing the fish soup I do no longer expect that there is probability 1 2 for the other meal to be twice as tasty See the article Step 2 in the argument above is flawed Before seeing the soup there was no difference in swapping but after seeing the soup I got some information and was able to decide whether I like that particular meal or not As you can see you were well aware that you only saw the first dish not eating it Back then you thought that that was clearly enough information to make a probability estimate of the tastiness of the other dish Have you changed your mind here too