Dutch-book arguments depragmatized: Epistemic consistency for partial believers

Journal of Philosophy 93 (9):450-479 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The most immediately appealing model for formal constraints on degrees of belief is provided by probability theory, which tells us, for instance, that the probability of P can never be greater than that of (P v Q). But while this model has much intuitive appeal, many have been concerned to provide arguments showing that ideally rational degrees of belief would conform to the calculus of probabilities. The arguments most frequently used to make this claim plausible are the so-called "Dutch Book" arguments.

Similar books and articles

Hidden Assumptions in the Dutch Book Argument.C. Waidacher - 1997 - Theory and Decision 43 (3):293-312.
Dutch Book Arguments and Consistency.Colin Howson - 1992 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:161 - 168.
Begging the Question and Bayesians.Brian Weatherson - 1999 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 30:687-697.
Preference-based arguments for probabilism.David Christensen - 2001 - Philosophy of Science 68 (3):356-376.
Scotching the dutch book argument.Peter Milne - 1990 - Erkenntnis 32 (1):105--26.
Is there a dutch book argument for probability kinematics?Brad Armendt - 1980 - Philosophy of Science 47 (4):583-588.
A nonpragmatic vindication of probabilism.James M. Joyce - 1998 - Philosophy of Science 65 (4):575-603.
Dutch Strategies for Diachronic Rules: When Believers See the Sure Loss Coming.Brad Armendt - 1992 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:217 - 229.
Depragmatized dutch book arguments.Patrick Maher - 1997 - Philosophy of Science 64 (2):291-305.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
472 (#38,917)

6 months
88 (#48,012)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

David Christensen
Brown University

Citations of this work

Accuracy, Risk, and the Principle of Indifference.Richard Pettigrew - 2016 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 92 (1):35-59.
Accuracy, Coherence and Evidence.Branden Fitelson & Kenny Easwaran - 2015 - Oxford Studies in Epistemology 5:61-96.
Accuracy and Coherence: Prospects for an Alethic Epistemology of Partial Belief.James M. Joyce - 2009 - In Franz Huber & Christoph Schmidt-Petri (eds.), Degrees of belief. London: Springer. pp. 263-297.
Time-Slice Rationality.Brian Hedden - 2015 - Mind 124 (494):449-491.

View all 57 citations / 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.
Two principles of bayesian epistemology.William Talbott - 1991 - Philosophical Studies 62 (2):135-150.
Dutch Books, Additivity, and Utility Theory.Brad Armendt - 1993 - Philosophical Topics 21 (1):1-20.
The Demons of Decision.Isaac Levi - 1987 - The Monist 70 (2):193-211.

View all 7 references / Add more references