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
    For a hypothesis to assign a determinate probability r to... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The Bayesian account of evidential support extends the hypothetical-deductive approach to cover cases where a hypothesis does not deductively entail or preclude an evidential outcome, but instead assigns a probability to that outcome

    For a hypothesis to assign a determinate probability r to an outcome, it must already presuppose a well-defined probability space, yet specifying that space typically requires background commitments that are themselves empirically contentious.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Probability assignments require partitioning outcome space, and what counts as a relevant partition depends on background theory about what's physically possible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Choosing between competing probability models (frequentist, Bayesian, propensity) involves prior commitments about causation and randomness that empirical data underdetermines.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Any determinate probability presupposes a measure over possibilities, but identifying which possibilities exist depends on contested metaphysical assumptions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Mathematical probability spaces can be stipulated formally without empirical commitment; background theory doesn't determine the mathematical structure itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The circularity claim conflates the epistemology of learning what space applies with the ontology of whether spaces can be well-defined independent of knowledge.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Many scientific hypotheses successfully assign determinate probabilities using standard spaces (normal distributions, Poisson processes) without resolving deeper metaphysical disputes.
      ?

      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.

    Key Terms

    Presuppose(what both foundationalisms supposedly do)
    To assume or take for granted something as true in order to make an argument work, without proving it first.
    Probability space(The unified system where acts, states, and outcomes interact in Jeffrey's framework)
    A mathematical structure that shows all the possible outcomes of a situation and assigns probabilities (chances) to each one.
    background commitments(in epistemology)
    Underlying beliefs or assumptions you're already taking for granted, often without realizing it.
    determinate probability(in probability theory)
    A specific, exact chance that something will happen—like saying there's a 50% chance of heads on a coin flip, rather than just 'maybe it will happen.'
    empirically contentious(in epistemology and philosophy of science)
    Something that people disagree about based on real-world evidence and observations, rather than pure logic.
    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
    well-defined(in mathematics and logic)
    Clear and precise enough that there's no confusion about what something means or how it works.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    Any determinate probability presupposes a measure over possibilities, but identi...Choosing between competing probability models (frequentist, Bayesian, propensity...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    Many scientific hypotheses successfully assign determinate probabilities using s...
    Mathematical probability spaces can be stipulated formally without empirical com...
    +3 moreShow less
    Probability assignments require partitioning outcome space, and what counts as a...The Bayesian account of evidential support extends the hypothetical-deductive ap...The circularity claim conflates the epistemology of learning what space applies ...