David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 156 (1):53 - 77 (2007)
The likelihood principle (LP) is a core issue in disagreements between Bayesian and frequentist statistical theories. Yet statements of the LP are often ambiguous, while arguments for why a Bayesian must accept it rely upon unexamined implicit premises. I distinguish two propositions associated with the LP, which I label LP1 and LP2. I maintain that there is a compelling Bayesian argument for LP1, based upon strict conditionalization, standard Bayesian decision theory, and a proposition I call the practical relevance principle. In contrast, I argue that there is no similarly compelling argument for or against LP2. I suggest that these conclusions lead to a restrictedly pluralistic view of Bayesian confirmation measures.
|Keywords||Philosophy Philosophy of Language Metaphysics Epistemology Logic Philosophy|
|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
Robert Nozick (1981). Philosophical Explanations. Harvard University Press.
Rudolf Carnap (1962). Logical Foundations of Probability. Chicago]University of Chicago Press.
Deborah G. Mayo (2001). Error and the Growth of Experimental Knowledge. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 15 (1):455-459.
Citations of this work BETA
Vincenzo Crupi & Katya Tentori (2014). State of the Field: Measuring Information and Confirmation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 47:81-90.
Vincenzo Crupi (2015). Inductive Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 44 (6):641-650.
J. Brian Pitts (2013). Irrelevant Conjunction and the Ratio Measure or Historical Skepticism. Synthese 190 (12):2117-2139.
Similar books and articles
Frederick Eberhardt & David Danks (2011). Confirmation in the Cognitive Sciences: The Problematic Case of Bayesian Models. [REVIEW] Minds and Machines 21 (3):389-410.
Branden Fitelson (1999). The Plurality of Bayesian Measures of Confirmation and the Problem of Measure Sensitivity. Philosophy of Science 66 (3):378.
Michael Strevens (2004). Bayesian Confirmation Theory: Inductive Logic, or Mere Inductive Framework? Synthese 141 (3):365 - 379.
Branden Fitelson (2001). Studies in Bayesian Confirmation Theory. Dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Donald A. Gillies (1988). Non-Bayesian Confirmation Theory, and the Principle of Explanatory Surplus. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:373 - 380.
Peter Kung (2010). On Having No Reason: Dogmatism and Bayesian Confirmation. Synthese 177 (1):1 - 17.
Richard Otte (1994). A Solution to a Problem for Bayesian Confirmation Theory. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 45 (2):764-769.
Andrew Backe (1999). The Likelihood Principle and the Reliability of Experiments. Philosophy of Science 66 (3):361.
Michael Levine (1997). Bayesian Analyses of Hume's Argument Concerning Miracles. Philosophy and Theology 10 (1):101-106.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads100 ( #37,476 of 1,789,791 )
Recent downloads (6 months)16 ( #50,501 of 1,789,791 )
How can I increase my downloads?