Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Any inductive logic that employs the same probability fun... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Any inductive logic that employs the same probability functions to represent both the probabilities of evidence claims due to hypotheses and the probabilities of hypotheses due to evidence claims must be a Bayesian inductive logic.

    Truth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Bayes' theorem follows directly from the axioms that any probability function must satisfy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Bayes' theorem expresses a necessary connection between the probabilities of evidence claims due to hypotheses and the probabilities of hypotheses due to those evidence claims.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An inductive logic using the same probability functions for both directions of inference necessarily invokes that necessary connection.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Probability functions satisfying Kolmogorov's axioms can be interpreted frequentistically, propensity-wise, or logically without any prior probability assignments over hypotheses.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Bayesian inductive logic is constitutively defined by the use of prior probabilities over hypotheses updated via conditionalization, not merely by application of Bayes' theorem.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Using Bayes' theorem as a mathematical identity does not entail the epistemic commitments—priors, conditionalization, coherence—that define Bayesian inference as a normative framework.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Halpern and colleagues have shown that probability-like functions satisfying weaker axiom sets (e.g., Dempster-Shafer belief functions) can coherently relate evidential support in both directions without collapsing into classical probability.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If non-Bayesian formalisms can represent both likelihoods and posterior-like degrees of support using the same formal apparatus, the alleged entailment from shared probability functions to Bayesianism is not logically necessary.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Key Terms

    Bayesian inductive logic(Distinguished from the narrower contemporary usage which associates the term exclusively with subjectivist or personalist accounts of probability.)
    In the broad sense: any inductive logic that gives Bayes' theorem a prominent role in inductive inferences, as opposed to approaches that largely eschew Bayes' theorem.
    Evidence claims(the observations or data we're working with in reasoning)
    Statements about facts or observations that we think we've discovered or measured in the world.
    Inductive logic(describes the type of logical system being discussed)
    A method of reasoning that starts with specific observations or evidence and uses them to draw general conclusions, rather than starting with general rules and deriving specifics from them.
    Probability functions(describes what the inductive logic uses to measure likelihood)
    Mathematical tools that calculate how likely something is to be true, assigning numbers between 0 (impossible) and 1 (certain) to different outcomes.
    Thomas Bayes(the historical figure the 'Bayesian' approach is named after)
    An 18th-century English mathematician and minister who developed a formula for updating beliefs based on new evidence, which became foundational to probability theory.
    hypothesis(Phase three of Dewey's pattern of inquiry)
    A construction that imaginatively utilizes both theoretical ideas and perceptual facts to forecast the possible consequences of various operations

    Related

    An inductive logic using the same probability functions for both directions of i...Bayes' theorem expresses a necessary connection between the probabilities of evi...Bayes' theorem follows directly from the axioms that any probability function mu...Bayesian inductive logic is constitutively defined by the use of prior probabili...
    +4 moreShow less
    Halpern and colleagues have shown that probability-like functions satisfying wea...If non-Bayesian formalisms can represent both likelihoods and posterior-like deg...

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: logic-inductive
    View source passageHide passage
    Elements of a logicist conception of inductive logic live on today as part of the general approach called Bayesian inductive logic. However, among philosophers and statisticians the term ‘Bayesian’ is now most closely associated with the subjectivist or personalist account of belief and decision. And the term ‘Bayesian inductive logic’ has come to carry the connotation of a logic that involves purely subjective probabilities. This usage is misleading since, for inductive logics, the Bayesian/non
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Probability functions satisfying Kolmogorov's axioms can be interpreted frequent...
    Using Bayes' theorem as a mathematical identity does not entail the epistemic co...

    Similar

    An inductive logic using the same probability functions for both direc...89%Bayesian inductive logic similarly provides rational rules for represe...87%The Criterion of Adequacy requires that a probabilistic inductive logi...86%The term 'Bayesian inductive logic' carrying the connotation of purely...84%
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit