David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 108 (1):105 - 125 (1996)
The aim of this paper is to distinguish between, and examine, three issues surrounding Humphreys's paradox and interpretation of conditional propensities. The first issue involves the controversy over the interpretation of inverse conditional propensities — conditional propensities in which the conditioned event occurs before the conditioning event. The second issue is the consistency of the dispositional nature of the propensity interpretation and the inversion theorems of the probability calculus, where an inversion theorem is any theorem of probability that makes explicit (or implicit) appeal to a conditional probability and its corresponding inverse conditional probability. The third issue concerns the relationship between the notion of stochastic independence which is supported by the propensity interpretation, and various notions of causal independence. In examining each of these issues, it is argued that the dispositional character of the propensity interpretation provides a consistent and useful interpretation of the probability calculus.
|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
Wesley Salmon (1984). Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World. Princeton University Press.
Philip Kitcher & Wesley Salmon (eds.) (1989). Scientific Explanation. Univ of Minnesota Pr.
Paul Humphreys (1985). Why Propensities Cannot Be Probabilities. Philosophical Review 94 (4):557-570.
I. J. Good (1961). A Causal Calculus (I). British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 11 (44):305-318.
Citations of this work BETA
Joseph Berkovitz (forthcoming). The Propensity Interpretation of Probability: A Re-Evaluation. Erkenntnis:1-83.
Similar books and articles
Mauricio Suárez (2004). On Quantum Propensities: Two Arguments Revisited. [REVIEW] Erkenntnis 61 (1):1-16.
Robert C. Stalnaker (1970). Probability and Conditionals. Philosophy of Science 37 (1):64-80.
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.
Thomas Bartelborth (2011). Propensities and Transcendental Assumptions. Erkenntnis 74 (3):363-381.
M. Albert (2007). The Propensity Theory: A Decision-Theoretic Restatement. Synthese 156 (3):587 - 603.
Henry E. Kyburg Jr (2002). Don't Take Unnecessary Chances! Synthese 132 (1/2):9 - 26.
Andrew Jb Fugard, Niki Pfeifer, Bastian Mayerhofer & Gernot D. Kleiter (2009). How People Interpret an Uncertain If. In T. Kroupa & J. Vejnarova (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on Uncertainty Processing.
A. J. B. Fugard, Niki Pfeifer, B. Mayerhofer & G. D. Kleiter (2009). How People Interpret an Uncertain If. In T. Kroupa & J. Vejnarova (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on Uncertainty Processing. 80-91.
Niall Shanks (1993). Time and the Propensity Interpretation of Probability. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 24 (2):293 - 302.
Paul Humphreys (2004). Some Considerations on Conditional Chances. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (4):667-680.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads39 ( #84,314 of 1,725,584 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #268,753 of 1,725,584 )
How can I increase my downloads?