In defence of a naïve conditional epistemology
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Numerous triviality results have been directed at a collection of views that tie the probability of a conditional sentence to the conditional probability of the consequent on its antecedent. In this paper I argue that this identification makes little sense if conditional sentences are context sensitive. The best alternative, I argue, is a version of the thesis which states that if your total evidence is E then the evidential probability of a conditional evaluated in a context where E is salient is the probability of the consequent given the antecedent. The biggest challenge to this thesis comes from the 'static' triviality arguments developed by Stalnaker, Hajek and Hall. It is argued that these arguments rely on invalid principles of conditional logic and that the thesis is consistent with a reasonably strong logic that does not include the principles in question.
|Keywords||conditionals probability Lewis triviality Stalnaker's thesis Adams' thesis|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Alan Hájek (2012). The Fall of “Adams' Thesis”? Journal of Logic, Language and Information 21 (2):145-161.
Charles G. Morgan (1999). Conditionals, Comparative Probability, and Triviality: The Conditional of Conditional Probability Cannot Be Represented in the Object Language. Topoi 18 (2):97-116.
Igor Douven & Sara Verbrugge (2013). The Probabilities of Conditionals Revisited. Cognitive Science 37 (4):711-730.
Daniel Rothschild (2014). Capturing the Relationship Between Conditionals and Conditional Probability with a Trivalent Semantics. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 24 (1-2):144-152.
Richard Bradley (2006). Adams Conditionals and Non-Monotonic Probabilities. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 15 (1-2):65-81.
Charles G. Morgan & Edwin D. Mares (1995). Conditionals, Probability, and Non-Triviality. Journal of Philosophical Logic 24 (5):455-467.
Igor Douven (2008). Kaufmann on the Probabilities of Conditionals. Journal of Philosophical Logic 37 (3):259 - 266.
Richard Bradley (2000). Conditionals and the Logic of Decision. Philosophy of Science 67 (3):32.
Niki Pfeifer (2012). Experiments on Aristotle's Thesis: Towards an Experimental Philosophy of Conditionals. The Monist 95 (2):223-240.
Robert C. Stalnaker (1970). Probability and Conditionals. Philosophy of Science 37 (1):64-80.
Stefan Kaufmann (2004). Conditioning Against the Grain. Journal of Philosophical Logic 33 (6):583-606.
Richard Bradley (1999). More Triviality. Journal of Philosophical Logic 28 (2):129-139.
Daniel Rothschild (2013). Do Indicative Conditionals Express Propositions? Noûs 47 (1):49-68.
Peter Milne (2012). Indicative Conditionals, Conditional Probabilities, and the “Defective Truth-Table”: A Request for More Experiments. Thinking and Reasoning 18 (2):196 - 224.
Frank Jackson (ed.) (1991). Conditionals. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2012-08-10
Total downloads42 ( #41,061 of 1,102,858 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #297,281 of 1,102,858 )
How can I increase my downloads?