Resolving Peer Disagreements Through Imprecise Probabilities

Elkin, Lee and Wheeler, Gregory (2018): Resolving Peer Disagreements Through Imprecise Probabilities. In: Nous, Vol. 52, No. 2: pp. 260-278

Abstract

Two compelling principles, the Reasonable Range Principle and the Preservation of Irrelevant Evidence Principle, are necessary conditions that any response to peer disagreements ought to abide by. The Reasonable Range Principle maintains that a resolution to a peer disagreement should not fall outside the range of views expressed by the peers in their dispute, whereas the Preservation of Irrelevant Evidence (PIE) Principle maintains that a resolution strategy should be able to preserve unanimous judgments of evidential irrelevance among the peers. No conciliatory Bayesian resolution strategy satisfies the PIE Principle, however, and we give a sure loss argument in support of PIE and against Bayes. The theory of imprecise probability allows one to satisfy both principles, and we introduce the notion of a set-based credal judgment to frame and address a range of subtle issues that arise in peer disagreements.

• Item Type: Journal article
• Form of publication: Preprint
• Faculties: Philosophy, Philosophy of Science and Religious Science > Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy (MCMP); Philosophy, Philosophy of Science and Religious Science > Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy (MCMP) > Epistemology
• Subjects: 100 Philosophy and Psychology > 120 Epistemology
• Annotation: First published online May 21, 2016
• Language: English