## Abstract

According to orthodox (Kolmogorovian) probability theory, conditional probabilities are by definition certain ratios of unconditional probabilities. As a result, orthodox conditional probabilities are regarded as undefined whenever their antecedents have zero unconditional probability. This has important ramifications for the notion of probabilistic *independence*. Traditionally, independence is defined in terms of unconditional probabilities (the factorization of the relevant joint unconditional probabilities). Various “equivalent” formulations of independence can be given using conditional probabilities. But these “equivalences” break down if conditional probabilities are permitted to have conditions with zero unconditional probability. We reconsider probabilistic independence in this more general setting. We argue that a less orthodox but more general (Popperian) theory of conditional probability should be used, and that much of the conventional wisdom about probabilistic independence needs to be rethought.

## Keywords

Conditional probability Independence Popper Confirmation## References

- Arntzenius, F. (1992). The common cause principle.
*Proceedings of the 1992 PSA conference*(Vol. 2, pp. 227–237).Google Scholar - Billingsley, P. (1995).
*Probability and measure*(3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar - Carnap, R. (1950).
*Logical foundations of probability*. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar - Carnap, R. (1952).
*The continuum of inductive methods*. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar - Easwaran, K. (2014). Regularity and hyperreal credences.
*The Philosophical Review*,*123*(1), 1–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Etchemendy, J. (1990).
*The concept of logical consequence*. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar - Feller, W. (1968).
*An introduction to probability theory and its applications*. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar - Fitelson, B. (1999). The plurality of Bayesian measures of confirmation and the problem of measure sensitivity. Philosophy of Science, S362–S378.Google Scholar
- Fitelson, B. (2001). Studies in Bayesian confirmation theory. PhD Dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
- Hájek, A. (2003). What conditional probability could not be.
*Synthese*,*137*(3), 273–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Kolmogorov, A. N. (1933/1950).
*Grundbegriffe der Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung, Ergebnisse Der Mathematik*(Trans. Foundations of probability). New York: Chelsea Publishing Company.Google Scholar - Lewis, D. (1979). Counterfactual dependence and time’s arrow.
*Noûs*,*13*, 455–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Lewis, D. (1980). A subjectivist’s guide to objective chance. In R. Carnap & R. C. Jeffrey (Eds.),
*Studies in inductive logic and probability*(Vol. 2, pp. 263–293). Berkeley: University of California Press. (Reprinted with added postscripts from*Philosophical papers*, Vol. 2, pp. 83–132, by D. Lewis, Ed., Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.)Google Scholar - Loève, M. (1977).
*Probability theory. I*(4th ed.). New York: Springer.Google Scholar - Papoulis, A. (1965).
*Probability, random variables, and stochastic processes*. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar - Parzen, E. (1960).
*Modern probability theory and its applications*. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar - Pfeiffer, P. (1990).
*Probability for applications*. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Popper, K. (1959).
*The logic of scientific discovery*. London: Hutchinson & Co.Google Scholar - Pruss, A. (2013). Probability, regularity and cardinality.
*Philosophy of Science*,*80*, 231–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Rényi, A. (1955). On a new axiomatic theory of probability.
*Acta Mathematica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae*,*6*, 285–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Roeper, P., & Leblanc, H. (1999).
*Probability theory and probability logic*. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar - Ross, S. (1998).
*A first course in probability*(5th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar - Rozanov, Y. A. (1977).
*Probability theory*(Revised English ed.) (R. A. Silverman, Translated from the Russian). New York: Dover.Google Scholar - Seidenfeld, T., Schervish, M. J., & Kadane, J. B. (2001). Improper regular conditional distributions.
*The Annals of Probability*,*29*(4), 1612–1624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar