Carnap and de finetti on bets and the probability of singular events: The dutch book argument reconsidered
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 29 (4):325-346 (1978)
| Abstract | This article has no associated abstract. (fix it) | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,705 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesC. Waidacher (1997). Hidden Assumptions in the Dutch Book Argument. Theory and Decision 43 (3):293-312.
Jürgen Humburg (1986). Foundations of a New System of Probability Theory. Topoi 5 (1):39-50.
Brad Armendt (1980). Is There a Dutch Book Argument for Probability Kinematics? Philosophy of Science 47 (4):583-588.
Colin Howson (2008). De Finetti, Countable Additivity, Consistency and Coherence. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (1):1-23.
Robert F. Nau (2001). De Finetti Was Right: Probability Does Not Exist. Theory and Decision 51 (2/4):89-124.
J. Williamson (1999). Countable Additivity and Subjective Probability. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 50 (3):401-416.
Richard Dietz (2010). On Generalizing Kolmogorov. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 51 (3):323-335.
Alan Hájek (2005). Scotching Dutch Books? Philosophical Perspectives 19 (1):139–151.
Teddy Seidenfeld & Mark J. Schervish (1983). A Conflict Between Finite Additivity and Avoiding Dutch Book. Philosophy of Science 50 (3):398-412.
Paul Bartha (2004). Countable Additivity and the de Finetti Lottery. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (2):301-321.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads20 ( #61,589 of 549,196 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,397 of 549,196 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
