Interpreting Probability: Controversies and Developments in the Early Twentieth Century

Cambridge University Press (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The term probability can be used in two main senses. In the frequency interpretation it is a limiting ratio in a sequence of repeatable events. In the Bayesian view, probability is a mental construct representing uncertainty. This 2002 book is about these two types of probability and investigates how, despite being adopted by scientists and statisticians in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, Bayesianism was discredited as a theory of scientific inference during the 1920s and 1930s. Through the examination of a dispute between two British scientists, the author argues that a choice between the two interpretations is not forced by pure logic or the mathematics of the situation, but depends on the experiences and aims of the individuals involved. The book should be of interest to students and scientists interested in statistics and probability theories and to general readers with an interest in the history, sociology and philosophy of science.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-02

Downloads
14 (#934,671)

6 months
5 (#544,079)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

How Degrees of Belief Reflect Evidence.James M. Joyce - 2005 - Philosophical Perspectives 19 (1):153-179.
Scientific method.Brian Hepburn & Hanne Andersen - 2015 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Tuning Your Priors to the World.Jacob Feldman - 2013 - Topics in Cognitive Science 5 (1):13-34.
Deterministic Laws and Epistemic Chances.Wayne C. Myrvold - 2010 - In Yemima Ben-Menahem & Meir Hemmo (eds.), Probability in Physics. Springer. pp. 73--85.
Current epistemological problems in evidence based medicine.R. E. Ashcroft - 2004 - Journal of Medical Ethics 30 (2):131-135.

View all 15 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references