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
    Howson and Urbach's formal Bayesian epistemology demonstr... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Probabilistic versions of abduction are either redundant or probabilistically incoherent, and therefore irrational to follow.

    Howson and Urbach's formal Bayesian epistemology demonstrates that coherent belief revision is fully characterized by conditionalization, leaving no formal role for explanatory considerations as independent update triggers.

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

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Key Terms

    Bayesian epistemology(in philosophy of knowledge)
    A theory of knowledge that uses probability and math to explain how people should update their beliefs when they get new information.
    Coherent belief revision(as the rational process of updating what you believe)
    Changing your beliefs in a way that keeps them logically consistent with each other and with new information you receive.
    Explanatory considerations(as alternative reasons for updating beliefs beyond mathematical probability)
    The idea that we might change our beliefs because one explanation for the facts is simpler, more elegant, or makes more sense than another—independent of pure probability.
    Howson and Urbach(as philosophers who created the framework being discussed)
    Two philosophers who developed an influential approach to understanding how we should evaluate evidence and build arguments using mathematical probability.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Explore a random proposition
    Start fresh with something unrelated.
    Update triggers(as what prompts a revision of beliefs)
    The reasons or mechanisms that cause someone to change their beliefs when new information comes in.
    conditionalization(Bayesian epistemology)
    The process of updating prior beliefs to interim beliefs by conditioning on the agent's hard information
    epistemology(Contrasted with purely descriptive scientific inquiry)
    A normative enterprise that tells us how we ought to reason from evidence and how we ought to justify our beliefs, as distinct from merely describing how we do reason or justify beliefs

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    Probabilistic versions of abduction are either redundant or probabilistically in...

    Details

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

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective