David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In J. Dubucs (ed.), Philosophy of Probability. Kluwer, Dordrecht 223-252 (1993)
And this paper is an attempt to say precisely how, thus addressing a philosophical problem which is commonly taken to be a serious one. It does so, however, in quite an idiosyncratic way. It is based on the account of inductive schemes I have given in (1988) and (1990a) and on the conception of causation I have presented in (1980), (1983), and (1990b), and it intends to fill one of many gaps which have been left by these papers. Still, I have tried to make this paper self-contained. Section 1 explains the philosophical question this paper is about; in more general terms it asks what might be meant by objectifying epistemic states or features of them and to which extent epistemic states can be objectified. The next sections introduce the basis I rely on with formal precision and some explanation; section 2 deals with induction and section 3 with causation. Within these confines, section 4 attempts to give an explication of the relevant sense of objectification and section 5 investigates the extent to which various features of epistemic states are objectifiable. The two most salient results are roughly that the relation "A is a reason for B" cannot be objectified at all and that the relation "A is a cause of B" can be objectified only under substantial, though reasonable restrictions. What has all of this to do with probability? A lot. The paper trades on a pervasive duality between probabilistic and deterministic epistemology, between a probabilistic representation of epistemic states together with a theory of probabilistic causation and another representation of epistemic states which I call deterministic because it lends itself, in a perfectly parallel fashion, to a theory of deterministic causation. Here I explicitly deal only with the deterministic side, but the duality should pave the way for further conclusions concerning objective probabilities and statistical laws. This outlook is briefly expanded in the final section 6
|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
Paul Noordhof (1999). Probabilistic Causation, Preemption and Counterfactuals. Mind 108 (429):95-125.
Wolfgang Spohn (1988). Ordinal Conditional Functions. A Dynamic Theory of Epistemic States. In W. L. Harper & B. Skyrms (eds.), Causation in Decision, Belief Change, and Statistics, vol. II. Kluwer
Lucy F. O'Brien (2005). Self-Knowledge, Agency, and Force. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 71 (3):580–601.
Wolfgang Spohn (2006). Causation: An Alternative. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (1):93-119.
Wolfgang Spohn (1990). A General Non-Probabilistic Theory of Inductive Reasoning. In R. D. Shachter, T. S. Levitt, J. Lemmer & L. N. Kanal (eds.), Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence 4. Elsevier
Wolfgang Spohn (2001). Deterministic Causation. In Wolfgang Spohn, Marion Ledwig & Michael Esfeld (eds.), Current Issues in Causation. Mentis 21-46.
Christopher Read Hitchcock (1993). A Generalized Probabilistic Theory of Causal Relevance. Synthese 97 (3):335 - 364.
Wolfgang Spohn (2004). Laws Are Persistent Inductives Schemes. In F. Stadler (ed.), Vienna Circle Institute Yearbook. Kluwer 11--135.
Added to index2009-06-15
Total downloads36 ( #118,527 of 1,934,422 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #434,207 of 1,934,422 )
How can I increase my downloads?