When betting odds and credences come apart: more worries for Dutch book arguments

Analysis 66 (2):119-127 (2006)
Authors
Darren Bradley
University of Leeds
Hannes Leitgeb
Ludwig Maximilians Universität, München
Abstract
If an agent believes that the probability of E being true is 1/2, should she accept a bet on E at even odds or better? Yes, but only given certain conditions. This paper is about what those conditions are. In particular, we think that there is a condition that has been overlooked so far in the literature. We discovered it in response to a paper by Hitchcock (2004) in which he argues for the 1/3 answer to the Sleeping Beauty problem. Hitchcock argues that this credence follows from calculating her fair betting odds, plus the assumption that Sleeping Beauty’s credences should track her fair betting odds. We will show that this last assumption is false. Sleeping Beauty’s credences should not follow her fair betting odds due to a peculiar feature of her epistemic situation.
Keywords Dutch books  Sleeping Beauty  Bayesian
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/analys/66.2.119
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

References found in this work BETA

Betting on Theories.Patrick Maher - 2008 - Cambridge University Press.
Beauty and the Bets.Christopher Hitchcock - 2004 - Synthese 139 (3):405 - 420.
Defeating Dr. Evil with Self-Locating Belief.Adam Elga - 2004 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 69 (2):383–396.
Clever Bookies and Coherent Beliefs.David Christensen - 1991 - Philosophical Review 100 (2):229-247.
Philosophical Papers.Frank Plumpton Ramsey - 1925 - Cambridge University Press.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Inertia, Optimism and Beauty.Patrick Hawley - 2013 - Noûs 47 (1):85-103.

View all 15 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

When Fair Betting Odds Are Not Degrees of Belief.T. Seidenfeld, M. J. Schervish & J. B. Kadane - 1990 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:517-524.
Dutch Book Arguments and Imprecise Probabilities.Seamus Bradley - 2012 - In Dennis Dieks, Stephan Hartmann, Michael Stoeltzner & Marcel Weber (eds.), Probabilities, Laws and Structures. Springer.
Scotching the Dutch Book Argument.Peter Milne - 1990 - Erkenntnis 32 (1):105--26.
Arguments for–or Against–Probabilism?A. Hajek - 2008 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (4):793-819.
Arguments For—Or Against—Probabilism?Alan Hájek - 2009 - In Franz Huber & Christoph Schmidt-Petri (eds.), British Journal for the Philosophy of Science. Springer. pp. 229--251.
Arbitrage and the Dutch Book Theorem.Robert Titiev - 1997 - Journal of Philosophical Research 22:477-482.
Depragmatized Dutch Book Arguments.Patrick Maher - 1997 - Philosophy of Science 64 (2):291-305.
Logic with Numbers.Colin Howson - 2007 - Synthese 156 (3):491-512.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total downloads
519 ( #5,831 of 2,308,523 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
50 ( #7,850 of 2,308,523 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature