A Better Way of Framing Williamson’s Coin-Tossing Argument, but It Still Does Not Work

Philosophy of Science 86 (2):366-374 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Timothy Williamson claimed to prove with a coin-tossing example that hyperreal probabilities cannot save the principle of regularity. A premise of his argument is that two specified infinitary events must be assigned the same probability because, he claims, they are isomorphic. But as has been pointed out, they are not isomorphic. A way of framing Williamson’s argument that does not make it depend on the isomorphism claim is in terms of shifts in Bernoulli processes, the usual mathematical model of sequential coin tossing. But even so framed, the argument still fails.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,795

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Regularity and infinitely tossed coins.Colin Howson - 2017 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 7 (1):97-102.
Weintraub’s response to Williamson’s coin flip argument.Matthew W. Parker - 2021 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 11 (3):1-21.
Fairness in life and Death Cases.Gerald Lang - 2005 - Erkenntnis 62 (3):321-351.
A Note on Safety and Iterated Knowledge.Eli Hirsch & Matthias Jenny - 2019 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 96 (2):244-254.
Morgenbesser’s Coin.Yael Loewenstein - 2021 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 51 (5):317-328.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-12-19

Downloads
46 (#486,196)

6 months
11 (#364,844)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Colin Howson
Last affiliation: London School of Economics

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Regularity and Hyperreal Credences.Kenny Easwaran - 2014 - Philosophical Review 123 (1):1-41.
Infinitesimal Probabilities.Vieri Benci, Leon Horsten & Sylvia Wenmackers - 2016 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 69 (2):509-552.
Probability, Regularity, and Cardinality.Alexander R. Pruss - 2013 - Philosophy of Science 80 (2):231-240.

View all 11 references / Add more references