On a General Bayesian Pattern Logic of Frequency-Based Logical Inclusion Fallacies
نویسنده
چکیده
Bayesian logic provides a rational model of probability judgments deviating from the standard extensional norm of extensional probability. It formalizes the general idea of an inductive pattern logic that may resolve paradoxes of inclusion. Bayesian logic predicts that it should be possible to generalize the phenomenon of frequency-based logical conjunction fallacies to a system of logical inclusion fallacies. In Experiment 1 quantitative conditions for conjunction fallacies and the role of negations are investigated. Experiment 2 provides a first test of the postulated more general system of logical inclusion fallacies. The results of both experiments confirmed the proposed pattern logic and its formalization as Bayesian logic. Other theories of the conjunction fallacy cannot readily explain this class of frequency-based and pattern-based inclusion fallacies. Whether there are simpler heuristics that may perhaps explain these data as well should be investigated in the future.
منابع مشابه
Logical Patterns in Individual and General Predication
Probability judgments about logical propositions have raised substantial doubts about human rationality. Here we explore the idea that people’s probability judgments often may not refer to the relative frequency of a set, but instead to the probability of an explanatory logical pattern given the data. This idea has been formalized by Bayesian logic (BL), predicting a system of frequency-based l...
متن کاملBayesian Logic and Trial-by-Trial Learning
Standard logic and probability theory are both beset with fundamental problems if used as adequacy criteria for relating logical propositions to learning data. We discuss the problems of exception, of sample size, and of inclusion. Bayesian pattern logic (‘Bayesian logic’ or BL for short) has been proposed as a possible rational resolution of these problems. BL can also be taken as psychologica...
متن کاملIs There a Monadic as well as a Dyadic Bayesian Logic? Two Logics Explaining Conjunction 'Fallacies'
Formal logic and probability theory are often considered the most fundamental norms of rational thought, but their application to psychological tasks has raised serious doubts about human rationality. A central finding is that people sometimes judge the probability of a conjunction to be higher than that of its conjuncts (conjunction fallacies, CFs). Bayesian logic (BL, von Sydow, 2011) formali...
متن کاملThe Relationship between Iranian EFL Learners’ Linguistic and Logical Intelligences and the Frequency of Fallacies and Evidence in their Argumentative Writing: A Gender-based Study
The learners’ ability to write a well-organized argumentative essay has gained prominence within the last decades. The multiple intelligences play a significant role in enhancing the precision of both language and thought during the writing process. The current study aimed at investigating the possible relationship between linguistic and logical intelligences and the frequency of informal falla...
متن کاملIntensional Probability Judgments and Inclusion Fallacies With Generics
The discussion of conjunction fallacies or, more generally, inclusion fallacies (IFs) is usually limited to dyadic relationships. Bayesian logic formalizes a rational intensional probability, predicting IFs and supplementing standard extensional probabilities (von Sydow, 2011, 2016). They treat logical patterns as explanatory patterns (explanans) given some data (the explanandum). We here addre...
متن کامل