David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
New results in the theory of nomic probability have led to a theory of probable probabilities, which licenses defeasible inferences between probabilities that are not validated by the probability calculus. Among these are classical principles of direct inference together with some new more general principles that greatly strengthen direct inference and make it much more useful.
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Niki Pfeifer & G. D. Kleiter (2006). Inference in Conditional Probability Logic. Kybernetika 42 (2):391--404.
Isaac Levi (1981). Direct Inference and Confirmational Conditionalization. Philosophy of Science 48 (4):532-552.
Ernest W. Adams (1996). Four Probability-Preserving Properties of Inferences. Journal of Philosophical Logic 25 (1):1 - 24.
John Pollock (2011). Reasoning Defeasibly About Probabilities. Synthese 181 (2):317 - 352.
Joel Pust (2011). Sleeping Beauty and Direct Inference. Analysis 71 (2):290-293.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads17 ( #103,143 of 1,101,856 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #68,243 of 1,101,856 )
How can I increase my downloads?