The dutch book argument: Its logical flaws, its subjective sources
Philosophical Studies 36 (1):19 - 33 (1979)
| 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: 5,664 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesColin Howson (1992). Dutch Book Arguments and Consistency. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:161 - 168.
Brad Armendt (1980). Is There a Dutch Book Argument for Probability Kinematics? Philosophy of Science 47 (4):583-588.
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.
Colin Howson (2008). De Finetti, Countable Additivity, Consistency and Coherence. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (1):1-23.
Daniel Silber (1999). Dutch Books and Agent Rationality. Theory and Decision 47 (3):247-266.
Paul Bartha (2004). Countable Additivity and the de Finetti Lottery. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (2):301-321.
C. Waidacher (1997). Hidden Assumptions in the Dutch Book Argument. Theory and Decision 43 (3):293-312.
J. Williamson (1999). Countable Additivity and Subjective Probability. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 50 (3):401-416.
Colin Howson (1989). Subjective Probabilities and Betting Quotients. Synthese 81 (1):1 - 8.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads13 ( #87,849 of 549,011 )Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,272 of 549,011 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
