Dutch Book against Lewis
نویسندگان
چکیده
Abstract According to the PCCP thesis, probability of a conditional A ? C is P( | ). This claim undermined by Lewis’ triviality results, which purport show that apart from trivial cases, not true. In present article we only rational, “Dutch Book-resistant” extension agent’s beliefs concerning non-conditional sentences and assuming ) = (i.e., in accord with PCCP). other cases diachronic Dutch Book against agent can be constructed. There tension between our findings needs explained. Therefore, space corresponds natural way Book—and allows interpreted as an event mathematically sound way. It also formalize notion conditionalizing on ¬ plays crucial role proof. Our conclusion proof circular, so it cannot considered argument PCCP.
منابع مشابه
Dutch Book against some ‘Objective’ Priors
‘Dutch book’ and ‘strong inconsistency’ are generally equivalent: there is a system of bets that makes money for the gambler, whatever the state of nature may be. As de Finetti showed, an odds-maker who is not a Bayesian is subject to a dutch book, under certain highly stylized rules of play – a fact often used as an argument against frequentists. However, so-called ‘objective’ or ‘uninformativ...
متن کاملDepragmatized Dutch Book Arguments*
Recently a number of authors have tried to avoid the failures of traditional Dutch book arguments by separating them from pragmatic concerns of avoiding a sure loss. In this paper I examine defenses of this kind by Howson and Urbach, Hellman, and Christensen. I construct rigorous explications of their arguments and show that they are not cogent. I advocate abandoning Dutch book arguments in fav...
متن کاملDutch Book Arguments and Imprecise Probabilities
I have an urn that contains 100 marbles. 30 of those marbles are red. The remainder are yellow. What sort of bets would you be willing to make on the outcome of the next marble drawn from the urn? What odds would you accept on the event “the next marble will be yellow?”. A reasonable punter should be willing to accept any betting quotient up to 0.7. I define “betting quotient” as the ratio of t...
متن کاملA Dutch Book Theorem for Quantificational Credences
In this paper I present an argument for a rational norm involving quantificational credences. To support this norm, I prove a result called a Dutch Book Theorem. In order to prove the result, I introduce the novel concept of a quantificational bet. I also undertake a discussion of Dutch Book Theorems in general and remark on the similarities and differences between the Dutch Book Theorem for qu...
متن کاملNotes on the Dutch Book Argument
The object here is to sketch the mathematics behind de Finetti’s (1931, 1937) argument for the Bayesian position. Suppose a bookie sets odds on all subsets of a set, accepting bets in any amount (positive or negative) on any combination of subsets. Unless the odds are computed from a prior probability, dutch book can be made: for some system of bets, the clever gambler wins a dollar or more, no...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: Synthese
سال: 2021
ISSN: ['0039-7857', '1573-0964']
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-021-03199-0