Keynes's weight of argument and Popper's paradox of ideal evidence

Philosophy of Science 59 (1):44-52 (1992)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Popper's paradox of ideal evidence has long been viewed as a telling criticism of Keynes's logical theory of probability and its associated concept of the weight of argument. This paper shows that a simple addition to Keynes's definitions of irrelevance enables his theory to elude the paradox with ease. The modified definition draws on ideas already present in Keynes's Treatise on Probability (1973). As a consequence, relevant evidence and the weight of argument may increase, even when new evidence leaves the probability unaltered

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,197

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
229 (#88,885)

6 months
23 (#120,782)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Resurrecting logical probability.James Franklin - 2001 - Erkenntnis 55 (2):277-305.
Inference to the best explanation and mechanisms in medicine.Stefan Dragulinescu - 2016 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 37 (3):211-232.
Imprecise Probability and the Measurement of Keynes's "Weight of Arguments".William Peden - 2018 - IfCoLog Journal of Logics and Their Applications 5 (4):677-708.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Logic of Scientific Discovery.Karl Popper - 1959 - Studia Logica 9:262-265.
The Rationality of Induction.D. C. STOVE - 1986 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 180 (4):716-719.
The paradox of ideal evidence.R. H. Vincent - 1962 - Philosophical Review 71 (4):497-503.

Add more references