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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Following a probabilistically incoherent rule is not nece... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Following a probabilistically incoherent rule is not necessarily irrational

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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A loss in one respect may be outweighed by a benefit in another
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A probabilistic version of abduction may perform better than Bayes' rule in our world by approaching the truth faster
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Approaching the truth faster (assigning high probability to the true hypothesis more quickly) is a benefit not readily expressed in monetary terms but should be taken into account when choosing an inference rule
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Notable Defenders

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
    Brian Skyrmscontemporary1993
    Patrick Mahercontemporary1992

    Connections

    2 topics

    Consequentialism2 linkedCausation1 linked

    Related

    A loss in one respect may be outweighed by a benefit in anotherA probabilistic version of abduction may perform better than Bayes' rule in our ...Approaching the truth faster (assigning high probability to the true hypothesis ...

    Similar

    If a probabilistic abduction rule is at variance with Bayes' rule, the...77%Having incomplete preferences is not irrational in situations involvin...73%Probabilistic incoherence means the rule may lead one to assess as fai...73%It is irrational to follow a rule that can lead one to assess as fair ...73%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: abduction
    View source passageHide passage
    However, this objection fares no better than the first. For one thing, as Patrick Maher (1992) and Brian Skyrms (1993) have pointed out, a loss in one respect may be outweighed by a benefit in another. It might be, for instance, that some probabilistic version of abduction does much better, at least in our world, than Bayes’ rule, in that, on average, it approaches the truth faster in the sense that it is faster in assigning a high probability (understood as probability above a certain threshold
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    1 (0 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit