Depragmatized dutch book arguments

Philosophy of Science 64 (2):291-305 (1997)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Recently a number of authors have tried to avoid the failures of traditional Dutch book arguments by separating them from pragmatic concerns of avoiding a sure loss. In this paper I examine defenses of this kind by Howson and Urbach, Hellman, and Christensen. I construct rigorous explications of their arguments and show that they are not cogent. I advocate abandoning Dutch book arguments in favor of a representation theorem

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,130

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

Begging the Question and Bayesians.Brian Weatherson - 1999 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 30:687-697.
Dutch Book Arguments and Consistency.Colin Howson - 1992 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:161 - 168.
XIII—Dutch Book and Accuracy Theorems.Anna Mahtani - 2021 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 120 (3):309-327.
Dutch Strategies for Diachronic Rules: When Believers See the Sure Loss Coming.Brad Armendt - 1992 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:217 - 229.
Arguments for–or against–Probabilism?Alan Hájek - 2008 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (4):793-819.
A mistake in dynamic coherence arguments?Brian Skyrms - 1993 - Philosophy of Science 60 (2):320-328.
Preference-based arguments for probabilism.David Christensen - 2001 - Philosophy of Science 68 (3):356-376.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
140 (#159,283)

6 months
6 (#851,951)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Dutch book arguments.Susan Vineberg - 2011 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Scotching Dutch Books?Alan Hájek - 2005 - Philosophical Perspectives 19 (1):139-151.
Ideological innocence.Daniel Rubio - 2022 - Synthese 200 (5):1-22.
From Classical to Intuitionistic Probability.Brian Weatherson - 2003 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 44 (2):111-123.

View all 26 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Scientific reasoning: the Bayesian approach.Peter Urbach & Colin Howson - 1993 - Chicago: Open Court. Edited by Peter Urbach.
The methodology of scientific research programmes.Imre Lakatos - 1978 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
Betting on Theories.Patrick Maher - 1993 - Cambridge, New York and Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
Bayes and beyond.Geoffrey Hellman - 1997 - Philosophy of Science 64 (2):191-221.

View all 7 references / Add more references