Erkenntnis:1-23 (forthcoming)

Authors
Mattias Skipper
Aarhus University
Abstract
Orthodox Bayesianism is a highly idealized theory of how we ought to live our epistemic lives. One of the most widely discussed idealizations is that of logical omniscience: the assumption that an agent’s degrees of belief must be probabilistically coherent to be rational. It is widely agreed that this assumption is problematic if we want to reason about bounded rationality, logical learning, or other aspects of non-ideal epistemic agency. Yet, we still lack a satisfying way to avoid logical omniscience within a Bayesian framework. Some proposals merely replace logical omniscience with a different logical idealization; others sacrifice all traits of logical competence on the altar of logical non-omniscience. We think a better strategy is available: by enriching the Bayesian framework with tools that allow us to capture what agents can and cannot infer given their limited cognitive resources, we can avoid logical omniscience while retaining the idea that rational degrees of belief are in an important way constrained by the laws of probability. In this paper, we offer a formal implementation of this strategy, show how the resulting framework solves the problem of logical omniscience, and compare it to orthodox Bayesianism as we know it.
Keywords Bayesianism  Logical omniscience  Bounded rationality  Logical learning
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10670-019-00186-3
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
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

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Dynamic Epistemic Logic and Logical Omniscience.Mattias Skipper Rasmussen - 2015 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 24 (3):377-399.
Plantinga e a justificação Bayesiana de crenças.Agnaldo Cuoco Portugal - 2012 - Veritas – Revista de Filosofia da Pucrs 57 (2):15-25.
A Dynamic Solution to the Problem of Logical Omniscience.Mattias Skipper & Jens Bjerring - 2019 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 48 (3):501-521.
Rational Credence Through Reasoning.Sinan Dogramaci - 2018 - Philosophers' Imprint 18.
Evidential Probabilities and Credences.Anna-Maria Eder - 2019 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science:1-21.
Two Dogmas of Strong Objective Bayesianism.Prasanta S. Bandyopadhyay & Gordon Brittan - 2010 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 24 (1):45 – 65.
Bayesianism and the Idea of Scientific Rationality.Jeremiah Joven Joaquin - 2017 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 17 (1):33-43.
Introduction: Bayesianism Into the 21st Century.Jon Williamson & David Corfield - 2001 - In David Corfield & Jon Williamson (eds.), Foundations of Bayesianism. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 1--16.
How to Be a Bayesian Dogmatist.Brian T. Miller - 2016 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 94 (4):766-780.
Ramsey and the Measurement of Belief.Richard Bradley - 2001 - In David Corfield & Jon Williamson (eds.), Foundations of Bayesianism.
Bayesianism and Simplicity.Ben Escoto - 2004 - Dissertation, Stanford University
Bayesian Scientific Methodology: A Naturalistic Approach.Yeongseo Yeo - 2002 - Dissertation, University of Missouri - Columbia

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-09-16

Total views
279 ( #29,029 of 2,404,067 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
73 ( #9,569 of 2,404,067 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes