Peirce on the method of balancing 'likelihoods'


Authors
Benjamin Jantzen
Virginia Tech
Abstract
Framed as a critique of David Hume’s analysis of miracles, Peirce offers a sustained argument against an approach to historical inference he calls the “Method of Balancing Likelihoods‘ (MBL). In MBL the posterior probability that a disputed historical event has occurred is computed on the basis of the prior probability of that event occurring and the probability that each purported witness of the event has given accurate testimony. Peirce’s critique of this method is hierarchical: he denies that an objective probability obtains for the truthfulness of witness testimony. Conceding this point, he asserts that, even if such objective probabilities exist, it is implausible to believe that witnesses are independent of one another. Conceding the first two points, Peirce argues that the very sampling process inherent to history necessarily introduces a strong probabilistic dependence that makes MBL unreliable. Finally, irrespective of the success of his first three criticisms, Peirce argues that MBL can be shown by empirical means to fail as a reliable method of inference. I reconstruct this hierarchical critique from a handful of Peirce’s manuscripts, and emphasize its continuing relevance for modern accounts of judgment aggregation
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.2979/tra.2009.45.4.668
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: 39,024
External links

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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Hume and Peirce on the Ultimate Stability of Belief.Ryan Pollock & David W. Agler - 2016 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 97 (2):245-269.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

C. S. Peirce's Search for a Method in Mathematics and the History of Science.Carolyn Eisele - 1975 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 11 (3):149 - 158.
Peirce's Conception of Philosophy: Its Method and Its Program.Catharine Wells Hantzis - 1987 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 23 (2):289 - 307.
Thought Is Essentially An Action.Jaime J. Marcio - 2001 - Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 21 (1):33-42.
Peirce’s ‘Prescision’ as a Transcendental Method.Gabriele Gava - 2011 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 19 (2):231 - 253.
Hume's "of Miracles," Peirce, and the Balancing of Likelihoods.Kenneth R. Merrill - 1991 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 29 (1):85 - 113.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-04-17

Total views
45 ( #160,575 of 2,320,215 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #823,483 of 2,320,215 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature