Subjective Probabilities Should be Sharp

Philosophers' Imprint 10 (05) (2010)
Many have claimed that unspecific evidence sometimes demands unsharp, indeterminate, imprecise, vague, or interval-valued probabilities. Against this, a variant of the diachronic Dutch Book argument shows that perfectly rational agents always have perfectly sharp probabilities
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 16,658
External links
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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

View all 25 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Seamus Bradley (2012). Dutch Book Arguments and Imprecise Probabilities. In Dennis Dieks, Stephan Hartmann, Michael Stoeltzner & Marcel Weber (eds.), Probabilities, Laws and Structures. Springer
Jordan Howard Sobel (1990). Conditional Probabilities, Conditionalization, and Dutch Books. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:503 - 515.
Donald Gillies (1991). Intersubjective Probability and Confirmation Theory. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 42 (4):513-533.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

87 ( #37,954 of 1,725,958 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

13 ( #52,504 of 1,725,958 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.