ABSTRACT
This chapter outlines temptations that mislead us in our struggle with the paradox. Three originate in legitimate methods of scientific and mathematical enquiry, methods which can be misapplied when addressing the philosophical problem of Bertrand’s paradox. I call them substitution, convention and distraction temptations. I examine these by drawing together instances we have seen in earlier chapters. The forth is philosophical and I examine it with a case study of the response of objective Bayesians to the paradox.
