Skip to main content
Log in

Indifference, neutrality and informativeness: generalizing the three prisoners paradox

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract.

The uniform prior distribution is often seen as a mathematical description of noninformativeness. This paper uses the well-known Three Prisoners Paradox to examine the impossibility of maintaining noninformativeness throughout hierarchization. The Paradox has been solved by Bayesian conditioning over the choice made by the Warder when asked to name a(nother) prisoner who will be shot. We generalize the paradox to situations of N prisoners, k executions and m announcements made by the Warder. We then extend the consequences of hierarchically placing uniform and symmetrical priors (for example in the classical N = 3, k = 2, m = 1 scenario) for the probability p of the Warder naming Prisoner B, say. We prove that breaks of indifference and neutrality caused by assignment of uniform and symmetrical priors in lieu of degenerate indifference probabilities hold in general. Speaking of unknown probabilities or of probability of a probability must be forbidden as meaningless. Bruno de Finetti, 1977 I regard the use of hierarchical chains as a technique helping you to sharpen your subjective probabilities. I. J. Good, 1981

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • D. Basu (1975) ArticleTitle‘Statistical Information and Likelihood’ Sankhya A 37 1–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayes, T.: 1763, ‘An Essay Towards Solving a Problem in the doctrine of chances’, Published posthumously in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 53, 370–418 and 54, 296–325. Reprinted in Biometrika 45 (1958), pp. 293–315, with a biographical note by G. A. Barnard.

  • J. M. Bernardo (1979) ArticleTitleReference posterior distributions for Bayesian inference Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B 41 113–147

    Google Scholar 

  • J. M. Bernardo A. F. M. Smith (1994) Bayesian Theory John Wiley and Sons New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Y. H. Chun (1999) ArticleTitleOn the Information Economics Approach to the Generalized Game Show Problem’ The American Statistician 53 43–51

    Google Scholar 

  • A. I. Dale (1991) History of Inverse Probability: From Thomas Bayes to Karl Pearson Springer-Verlag Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • B. Finetti ParticleDe (1972) Probability, Induction and Statistics JohnWiley and Sons New York

    Google Scholar 

  • B. Finetti ParticleDe (1975) Theory of Probability John Wiley and Sons New York

    Google Scholar 

  • De Finetti, B.: 1977, Probabilities of Probabilities: A real Problem or aMisunderstanding?, in A. Aykac and C. Brumat (eds.), New Developments in the Application of Bayesian Methods, North Holland, Amsterdam.

  • M. H. DeGroot (1970) Optimal Statistical Decisions McGraw-Hill New York

    Google Scholar 

  • P. Diaconis S. L. Zabell (1982) ArticleTitleUpdating Subjective Probability’ Journal of the American Statistical Association 77 822–830

    Google Scholar 

  • Good, I. J.: 1981, ‘Some History of the Hierarchical Bayesian Methodology’, in J. M. Bernardo et al. (eds.), Bayesian Statistics, University of Valencia Press, Valencia. Reprinted in Good, I. J.: 1983, Good Thinking: The Foundations of Probability and Its Applications, University of Minnesota, Minnesota.

  • I. Hacking (1967) ArticleTitle‘Slightly More Realistic Personal Probability’ Philosophy of Science 34 311–325 Occurrence Handle10.1086/288169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • C. Howson (1996) ArticleTitle‘Bayesian Rules of Updating’ Erkenntnis. 45 195–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Howson, C. and P. Urbach: 1993, Scientific Reasoning: The Bayesian Approach, 2nd edn, Open Court, Chicago.

  • R. Jeffrey (1965) The Logic of Decision McGraw-Hill New York

    Google Scholar 

  • R. Jeffrey (1992) Probability and the Art of Judgment Cambridge University Press Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Jeffreys (1946) ArticleTitle‘An Invariant Form for the Prior Probability in Estimation Problems Proc Royal Society London A 186 453–461

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Jeffreys (1961) Theory of Probability University Press Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • P. S. Laplace (1774) ArticleTitle‘Mémoire sur la probabilité des causes par les évènemens’ Mémoires de l’Académie Royale des Sciences presentés par divers savans. 6 621–656

    Google Scholar 

  • Laplace, P. S.: 1812, Théorie Analytique des Probabilités, Courcier, Paris. Reprinted in Laplace, 1878–1912, Oeuvres complètes de Laplace, 14 vols, Gauthier-Villars, Paris.

  • J. P. Morgan N. R. Chaganty R. C. Dahiya M. J. Doviak (1991) ArticleTitleLet’s Make a Deal: The Player’s Dilemma’ The American Statistician 45 284–289

    Google Scholar 

  • S. M. Stigler (1982) ArticleTitle‘Thomas Bayes’ Bayesian Inference’ Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A 145 250–258

    Google Scholar 

  • S. M. Stigler (1986a) The History of Statistics University Press Harvard

    Google Scholar 

  • S. M. Stigler (1986b) ArticleTitle‘Laplace’s 1774 Memoir on Inverse Probability’ Statistical Science 1 359–378

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sergio Wechsler.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wechsler, S., Esteves, L.G., Simonis, A. et al. Indifference, neutrality and informativeness: generalizing the three prisoners paradox. Synthese 143, 255–272 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-005-7016-1

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-005-7016-1

Keywords

Navigation