David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy of Science 77 (2):201-235 (2010)
One of the fundamental problems of epistemology is to say when the evidence in an agent’s possession justifies the beliefs she holds. In this paper and its sequel, we defend the Bayesian solution to this problem by appealing to the following fundamental norm: Accuracy An epistemic agent ought to minimize the inaccuracy of her partial beliefs. In this paper, we make this norm mathematically precise in various ways. We describe three epistemic dilemmas that an agent might face if she attempts to follow Accuracy, and we show that the only inaccuracy measures that do not give rise to such dilemmas are the quadratic inaccuracy measures. In the sequel, we derive the main tenets of Bayesianism from the relevant mathematical versions of Accuracy to which this characterization of the legitimate inaccuracy measures gives rise, but we also show that Jeffrey conditionalization has to be replaced by a different method of update in order for Accuracy to be satisfied.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
J. R. G. Williams (2012). Gradational Accuracy and Nonclassical Semantics. Review of Symbolic Logic 5 (4):513-537.
Michael G. Titelbaum (2013). Ten Reasons to Care About the Sleeping Beauty Problem. Philosophy Compass 8 (11):1003-1017.
Richard Pettigrew (2013). A New Epistemic Utility Argument for the Principal Principle. Episteme 10 (1):19-35.
Benjamin Anders Levinstein (2012). Leitgeb and Pettigrew on Accuracy and Updating. Philosophy of Science 79 (3):413-424.
Sophie Horowitz (2013). Immoderately Rational. Philosophical Studies 167 (1):1-16.
Similar books and articles
James M. Joyce (1998). A Nonpragmatic Vindication of Probabilism. Philosophy of Science 65 (4):575-603.
Jon Williamson (2011). Objective Bayesianism, Bayesian Conditionalisation and Voluntarism. Synthese 178 (1):67-85.
Hasok Chang (1997). Can Planck's Constant Be Measured with Classical Mechanics? International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 11 (3):223 – 243.
Brian Kierland & Bradley Monton (2005). Minimizing Inaccuracy for Self-Locating Beliefs. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 70 (2):384-395.
Gillian Cohen (1998). Measuring Accuracy is an Intractable Problem. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):164-164.
Hannes Leitgeb & Richard Pettigrew (2010). An Objective Justification of Bayesianism II: The Consequences of Minimizing Inaccuracy. Philosophy of Science 77 (2):236-272.
Added to index2009-11-21
Total downloads88 ( #13,650 of 1,099,017 )
Recent downloads (6 months)10 ( #19,150 of 1,099,017 )
How can I increase my downloads?