Oracles, Aesthetics, and Bayesian Consensus

Philosophy of Science 63 (Supplement):273-280 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In order for Bayesian inquiry to count as objective, one might argue that it must lead to a consensus among those who use it and share evidence, but presumably this is not enough. It has been proposed that one should also require that the consensus be reached from very different initial opinions by conditioning only on basic experimental evidence, evidence free from subjective, social, or psychological influence. I will argue here, however, that this notion of objectivity in Bayesian inquiry is too narrow.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,991

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
41 (#399,798)

6 months
17 (#161,791)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jeffrey Barrett
University of California, Irvine

Citations of this work

Resurrecting logical probability.James Franklin - 2001 - Erkenntnis 55 (2):277-305.
Predictivism for pluralists.Eric Christian Barnes - 2005 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (3):421-450.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Conditionalization and observation.Paul Teller - 1973 - Synthese 26 (2):218-258.
Dynamic coherence and probability kinematics.Brian Skyrms - 1987 - Philosophy of Science 54 (1):1-20.
Review. [REVIEW]Barry Gower - 1997 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 48 (1):555-559.

Add more references