Erkenntnis 70 (2):237-252 (2009)

Abstract
This essay answers the “Bayesian Challenge,” which is an argument offered by Bayesians that concludes that belief is not relevant to rational action. Patrick Maher and Mark Kaplan argued that this is so because there is no satisfactory way of making sense of how it would matter. The two ways considered so far, acting as if a belief is true and acting as if a belief has a probability over a threshold, do not work. Contrary to Maher and Kaplan, Keith Frankish argued that there is a way to make sense of how belief matters by introducing a dual process theory of mind in which decisions are made at the conscious level using premising policies . I argue that Bayesian decision theory alone shows that it is sometimes rational to base decisions on beliefs; we do not need a dual process theory of mind to solve the Bayesian Challenge. This point is made clearer when we consider decision levels : acting as if a belief is true is sometimes rational at higher decision levels.
Keywords Philosophy   Philosophy   Epistemology   Ontology   Ethics   Logic
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10670-008-9142-x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 56,060
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

Knowledge and Practical Interests.Jason Stanley - 2005 - Oxford University Press.
Betting on Theories.Patrick Maher - 1993 - Cambridge University Press.
The Scientist Qua Scientist Makes Value Judgments.Richard Rudner - 1953 - Philosophy of Science 20 (1):1-6.
Decision Theory as Philosophy.Mark Kaplan - 1983 - Philosophy of Science 50 (4):549-577.

View all 12 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Bayesianism and Language Change.Jon Williamson - 2003 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 12 (1):53-97.
Bayes and Beyond.Geoffrey Hellman - 1997 - Philosophy of Science 64 (2):191-221.
The Reliability Challenge and the Epistemology of Logic.Joshua Schechter - 2010 - Philosophical Perspectives 24 (1):437-464.
The Role of Bayesian Philosophy Within Bayesian Model Selection.Jan Sprenger - 2013 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 3 (1):101-114.
Dissolving the Star-Tree Paradox.Bengt Autzen - 2016 - Biology and Philosophy 31 (3):409-419.
Significance Testing in Theory and Practice.Daniel Greco - 2011 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 62 (3):607-637.
Updating, Undermining, and Independence.Jonathan Weisberg - 2015 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 66 (1):121-159.
Bayesian Inference and its Application to Meta-Analysis of Epidemiologic Data.Pamela Anne Trudeau - 1991 - Dissertation, The University of Texas Health Sciences Center at Houston School of Public Health
Bayesian Probability.Patrick Maher - 2010 - Synthese 172 (1):119 - 127.
Answering Brody's Challenge From a Pharmapologist Perspective.Thomas D. Harter - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (1):29 - 30.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
78 ( #126,574 of 2,403,718 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #360,211 of 2,403,718 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes