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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Ramsey and de Finetti's subjectivism was itself constrained by coherence norms that rule out many divergent probability assignments as irrational.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Coherence constraints emerge from instrumental rationality, not from subjectivism itself—they're independent additions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim conflates logical consistency with substantive constraints on which probabilities are permissible overall.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Subjectivism's core claim is that probabilities reflect personal credences; coherence merely disciplines their expression.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Coherence constraints (like Dutch Book arguments) are logically necessary to prevent self-defeating belief systems.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Ramsey and de Finetti explicitly grounded probability in consistency requirements, not pure subjective freedom.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Any rational agent must reject belief assignments that guarantee losses, making coherence normatively binding.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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