Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-qks25 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-07T06:52:59.746Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Accuracy, Language Dependence, and Joyce's Argument for Probabilism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Abstract

In this article, I explain how a variant of David Miller's argument concerning the language dependence of the accuracy of predictions can be applied to Joyce's notion of the accuracy of “estimates of numerical truth-values” (i.e., Joycean credences). This leads to a potential problem for Joyce's accuracy-dominance-based argument for the conclusion that credences (understood as “estimates of numerical truth-values” in Joyce's sense) should obey the probability calculus.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

I would like to thank Kenny Easwaran, Ben Levinstein, David Miller, Wolfgang Schwarz, Mike Titelbaum, Robbie Williams, and two anonymous referees of this journal for useful comments on earlier drafts.

References

Hacking, I. 1975. “Salmon's Vindication of Induction.” Journal of Philosophy 62 (10): 260–66.Google Scholar
Joyce, J. 1975. “A Nonpragmatic Vindication of Probabilism.” Philosophy of Science 65 (4): 575603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D. 1975. “The Accuracy of Predictions.” Synthese 30 (1): 159–91.Google Scholar
Miller, D.. 2006. Out of Error: Further Essays on Critical Rationalism. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Popper, K. 1972. Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Szirtes, T. 2007. Applied Dimensional Analysis and Modeling. 2nd ed. Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar