Roger white’s argument against imprecise credences


Authors
Dylan Dodd
University of Alaska, Anchorage
Abstract
According to the Imprecise Credence Framework (ICF), a rational believer's doxastic state should be modelled by a set of probability functions rather than a single probability function, namely, the set of probability functions allowed by the evidence ( Joyce [2005] ). Roger White ( [2010] ) has recently given an arresting argument against the ICF, which has garnered a number of responses. In this article, I attempt to cast doubt on his argument. First, I point out that it's not an argument against the ICF per se , but an argument for the Principle of Indifference. Second, I present an argument that's analogous to White's. I argue that if White's premises are true, the premises of this argument are too. But the premises of my argument entail something obviously false. Therefore, White's premises must not all be true
Keywords probability  imprecise probability  credence  degree of belief  formal epistemology  Bayesianism  Bertrand's Paradox  Principle of Indifference
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/bjps/axs014
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 41,481
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Laws and Symmetry.Bas C. van Fraassen - 1989 - Oxford University Press.
How Probabilities Reflect Evidence.James Joyce - 2005 - Philosophical Perspectives 19 (1):153–178.
Evidential Symmetry and Mushy Credence.Roger White - 2009 - In T. Szabo Gendler & J. Hawthorne (eds.), Oxford Studies in Epistemology. Oxford University Press. pp. 161-186.
Demystifying Dilation.Arthur Paul Pedersen & Gregory Wheeler - 2014 - Erkenntnis 79 (6):1305-1342.

View all 8 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Imprecise Probabilities.Anna Mahtani - 2019 - In Richard Pettigrew & Jonathan Weisberg (eds.), The Open Handbook of Formal Epistemology. PhilPapers Foundation. pp. 107-130.
In Defence of Dogmatism.Luca Moretti - 2015 - Philosophical Studies 172 (1):261-282.
Intuitive Dilation?Casey Hart & Michael G. Titelbaum - 2015 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 4 (4):252-262.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2012-09-05

Total views
82 ( #94,422 of 2,248,507 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #1,031,786 of 2,248,507 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature