No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2022
In this essay, I analyze and critique Richard Jeffrey's radical probabilism. The basic theses defining it are examined, particularly the idea that probabilistic coherence involves a kind of “consistency.” The main challenges to Jeffrey's view are (1) that there is an inconsistency between regarding probabilities as subjective and some probabilistic judgments as better than others, and (2) that decision theory so conceived has no normative import. I argue that both of these challenges can be met.
I thank my fellow participants on the panel, Brian Skyrms and Persi Diaconis, and especially Alan Hájek, as well as the audience. It was a splendid session and an honor to participate. Also, thanks to Brad Armendt for helpful lunchtime conversation before the presentation.