Erkenntnis

, Volume 65, Issue 2, pp 185–206 | Cite as

The Concept of Inductive Probability

Article

Abstract

The word ‘probability’ in ordinary language has two different senses, here called inductive and physical probability. This paper examines the concept of inductive probability. Attempts to express this concept in other words are shown to be either incorrect or else trivial. In particular, inductive probability is not the same as degree of belief. It is argued that inductive probabilities exist; subjectivist arguments to the contrary are rebutted. Finally, it is argued that inductive probability is an important concept and that it is a mistake to try to replace it with the concept of degree of belief, as is usual today.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alston W. P. (1985). Concepts of Epistemic Justification. The Monist 68(1): 57–89Google Scholar
  2. Bacchus F. (1990). Representing and Reasoning with Probabilistic Knowledge. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernardo J. M. and Smith A. F. M. ( 1994). Bayesian Theory. Wiley, Chichester, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  4. Carnap R. (1950). Logical Foundations of Probability. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  5. (1972). Probability, Induction and Statistics. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. de Finetti, B.: 1980, ‘Probability: Beware of Falsifications!’, in H. E. Kyburg Jr. and H. E. Smokler (eds.), Studies in Subjective Probability, 2nd edn, Huntington, NY: Krieger, pp. 193–224Google Scholar
  7. (1985). Cambridge Probability Theorists. The Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies 53(4): 348–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Franklin J. (2001). Resurrecting Logical Probability. Erkenntnis 55: 277–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gillies D. (2000). Philosophical Theories of Probability. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Hacking I. (1975). The Emergence of Probability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  11. Hacking I. (2001). An Introduction to Probability and Inductive Logic. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  12. Howson C. and Urbach P. (1993). Scientific Reasoning: The Bayesian Approach. Open Court, Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  13. Keynes J. M. (1921). A Treatise on Probability. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. (1980). Studies in Subjective Probability. Krieger, Huntington, NYGoogle Scholar
  15. Maher P. (1993). Betting on Theories. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  16. Maher P. (2004). Probability Captures the Logic of Scientific Confirmation. In: Hitchcock, C. R. (eds) Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Science, pp 69–93. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  17. Ramsey, F. P.: 1926, ‘Truth and Probability’, in H. E. Kyburg Jr. and H. E. Smokler (eds), Studies in Subjective Probability, 2nd edn, Huntington, NY: Krieger, pp. 25–52Google Scholar
  18. Roeper P. and Leblanc H. ( 1999). Probability Theory and Probability Logic. University of Toronto Press, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  19. Salmon W. C. (1967). The Foundations of Scientific Inference. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, PAGoogle Scholar
  20. Skyrms B. (1986). Choice and Chance: An Introduction to Inductive Logic. Wadsworth, Belmont, CAGoogle Scholar
  21. Suppe F. (1998). Operationalism. In: Craig, E. (eds) Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, pp. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. (1989). Laws and Symmetry. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA

Personalised recommendations