David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:517-524 (1990)
The "Dutch Book" argument, tracing back to Ramsey and to deFinetti, offers prudential grounds for action in conformity with personal probability. Under several structural assumptions about combinations of stakes, your betting policy is coherent only if your fair odds are probabilities. The central question posed here is the following one: Besides providing an operational test of coherent betting, does the "Book" argument also provide for adequate measurement of the agents degrees of beliefs? That is, are an agent's fair odds also his/her personal probabilities for those events? We argue the answer is "No!" The problem is caused by the possibility of state dependent utilities
|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
Darrell P. Rowbottom (2012). Objective Bayesianism Defended? Metascience 21 (1):193-196.
Jeffrey Helzner (2013). Epistemology and Economics. Synthese 190 (5):781-786.
Similar books and articles
Darren Bradley & Hannes Leitgeb (2006). When Betting Odds and Credences Come Apart: More Worries for Dutch Book Arguments. Analysis 66 (290):119–127.
Peter Milne (1990). Scotching the Dutch Book Argument. Erkenntnis 32 (1):105--26.
Darrell P. Rowbottom (2007). The Insufficiency of the Dutch Book Argument. Studia Logica 87 (1):65 - 71.
Peter Milne (2009). What is the Normative Role of Logic? Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 83 (1):269-298.
Wlodek Rabinowicz (2002). Does Practical Deliberation Crowd Out Self-Prediction? Erkenntnis 57 (1):91-122.
H. M. Malm (1989). Commodification or Compensation: A Reply to Ketchum. Hypatia 4 (3):128-135.
J. L. Schellenberg (2005). The Hiddenness Argument Revisited. Religious Studies 41 (3):287-303.
H. E. Baber (1987). How Bad Is Rape? Hypatia 2 (2):125-138.
P. X. Monaghan (2010). A Novel Interpretation of Plato's Theory of Forms. Metaphysica 11 (1):63-78.
Peter J. Taylor (1994). Shifting Frames: From Divided to Distributed Psychologies of Scientific Agents. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:304-310.
Wlodek Rabinowicz & Luc Bovens (2011). Bets on Hats: On Dutch Books Against Groups, Degrees of Belief as Betting Rates, and Group-Reflection. Episteme 8 (3):281-300.
Darrell P. Rowbottom (2013). Group Level Interpretations of Probability: New Directions. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 94 (2):188-203.
J. Williamson (2006). From Bayesianism to the Epistemic View of Mathematics: Review of R. Jeffrey, Subjective Probability: The Real Thing. [REVIEW] Philosophia Mathematica 14 (3):365-369.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads14 ( #281,028 of 1,937,418 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #456,797 of 1,937,418 )
How can I increase my downloads?