Abstract
Real human agents, even when they are rational by everyday standards, sometimes assign different credences to objectively equivalent statements, such as ‘Orwell is a writer’ and ‘E.A. Blair is a writer’, or credences less than 1 to necessarily true statements, such as not-yet-proven theorems of arithmetic. Anna Mahtani calls this the phenomenon of ‘opacity’. Opaque credences seem probabilistically incoherent, which goes against a key modelling assumption of probability theory. I sketch a modelling strategy for capturing opaque credence assignments without abandoning probabilistic coherence. I draw on ideas from judgement-aggregation theory, where we face similar challenges of defining the ‘objects of judgement’.
Dokumententyp: | Zeitschriftenartikel |
---|---|
Fakultät: | Philosophie, Wissenschaftstheorie und Religionswissenschaft |
Themengebiete: | 100 Philosophie und Psychologie > 100 Philosophie
100 Philosophie und Psychologie > 160 Logik |
URN: | urn:nbn:de:bvb:19-epub-122121-4 |
ISSN: | 0266-2671 |
Sprache: | Englisch |
Dokumenten ID: | 122121 |
Datum der Veröffentlichung auf Open Access LMU: | 05. Nov. 2024 15:11 |
Letzte Änderungen: | 05. Nov. 2024 15:11 |