Why There Cannot be a Single Probabilistic Measure of Coherence

  • Luc Bovens
  • Stephan Hartmann


Bayesian Coherence Theory of Justification or, for short, Bayesian Coherentism, is characterized by two theses, viz. (i) that our degree of confidence in the content of a set of propositions is positively affected by the coherence of the set, and (ii) that coherence can be characterized in probabilistic terms. There has been a longstanding question of how to construct a measure of coherence. We will show that Bayesian Coherentism cannot rest on a single measure of coherence, but requires a vector whose components exhaustively characterize the coherence properties of the set. Our degree of confidence in the content of the information set is a function of the reliability of the sources and the components of the coherence vector. The components of this coherence vector are weakly but not strongly separable, which blocks the construction of a single coherence measure.


Propositional Variable Liquid Content Coherence Measure Internal Coherence Strong Separability 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bovens, L. and S. Hartmann: 2003a, ‘Solving the Riddle of Coherence’, Mind 112, 601–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bovens, L. and S. Hartmann: 2003b, Bayesian Epistemology, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  3. Bovens, L. and E. J. Olsson: 2000, ‘Coherentism, Reliability and Bayesian Networks’, Mind 109, 685–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bovens, L. and E. J. Olsson: 2002, ‘Believing More, Risking Less-On Coherence, Truth and Non-Trivial Extensions’, Erkenntnis 52, 137–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Broome, J.: 1991, Weighing Goods, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  6. Debreu, G.: 1960, ‘Topological Methods in Cardinal Utility Theory’, in Kenneth J. Arrow, Samuel Karlin and Patrick Suppes (eds.): 1959, Mathematical Methods in the Social Sciences 1959: Proceedings of the First Stanford Symposium. Stanford University Press, Stanford, pp. 16–26.Google Scholar
  7. Earman, J.: 2000, Hume’s Abject Failure, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  8. Dietrich, F. and L. Moretti: 2006, ‘On Coherent Sets and the Transmission of Confirmation’, Philosophy of Science 72(3), 403–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Olsson, E. J.: 2001, ‘Why Coherence is not Truth-Conducive’, Analysis 61, 186–193.Google Scholar
  10. Olsson, E. J.: 2002, ‘What is the Problem of Coherence and Truth?’, Journal of Philosophy 94, 246–272.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luc Bovens
    • 1
  • Stephan Hartmann
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Philosophy, Logic, and Scientific MethodLondon School of Economics and Political ScienceLondonUK

Personalised recommendations