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
    The term 'Bayesian inductive logic' carrying the connotat... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The term 'Bayesian inductive logic' carrying the connotation of purely subjective probabilities is misleading.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.De Finetti's representation theorem grounds Bayesian updating in exchangeability, a structural constraint, not purely subjective degrees of belief.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Objective Bayesians like Jaynes and Williamson derive prior probabilities from logical or epistemic constraints, decoupling Bayesianism from subjectivism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Labeling the framework 'subjective' obscures that Bayes' theorem is a mathematical theorem valid across all interpretations of probability.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Harold Jeffreys developed a fully Bayesian inductive logic using objective, invariant priors derived from the Fisher information metric, not personal credences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The conflation of 'Bayesian' with 'subjective' tacitly privileges the Savage-Ramsey personalist tradition over equally rigorous objective Bayesian programs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Carnap's inductive logic uses confirmation functions satisfying Bayesian coherence without any commitment to purely subjective probability assignments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The Bayesian/non-Bayesian distinction for inductive logics should turn on whether the logic gives Bayes' theorem a prominent role.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Classical approaches to statistical inference developed by Fisher and by Neyman & Pearson largely eschew Bayes' theorem and are therefore non-Bayesian.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The current usage conflates the subjectivist/personalist account of belief with Bayesian inductive logic, which are distinct concepts.
      ?

      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

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Skepticism1 linked

    Related

    Carnap's inductive logic uses confirmation functions satisfying Bayesian coheren...Classical approaches to statistical inference developed by Fisher and by Neyman ...De Finetti's representation theorem grounds Bayesian updating in exchangeability...Harold Jeffreys developed a fully Bayesian inductive logic using objective, inva...
    +5 moreShow less
    Labeling the framework 'subjective' obscures that Bayes' theorem is a mathematic...Objective Bayesians like Jaynes and Williamson derive prior probabilities from l...The Bayesian/non-Bayesian distinction for inductive logics should turn on whethe...The conflation of 'Bayesian' with 'subjective' tacitly privileges the Savage-Ram...The current usage conflates the subjectivist/personalist account of belief with ...

    Similar

    Any inductive logic that employs the same probability functions to rep...84%Bayesian inductive logic similarly provides rational rules for represe...82%The current usage conflates the subjectivist/personalist account of be...80%The Criterion of Adequacy requires that a probabilistic inductive logi...79%

    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

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit