Advanced

The Only Probability is Verbal Probability

Masterton, George LU (2014) In Metaphysica 15(1). p.69-84
Abstract
In 1977 van Fraassen showed convincingly, and in detail, how one can

give a dissentive answer to the question “[a]re there necessities in nature?”. In

this paper, I follow his lead and show in a similar fashion and detail, how it is 5

possible to give a dissentive answer to: Are there probabilities in nature? This is

achieved by giving a partial analysis – with the aid of Kaplanian pragmatics – of

objective chance in terms of that credence that is reasonable where prevailing

laws and conditions exhaust one’s evidence. This template belongs firmly within

the established Bayesian program of analysing objective chance as ultimate 10

belief. Its contribution to that... (More)
In 1977 van Fraassen showed convincingly, and in detail, how one can

give a dissentive answer to the question “[a]re there necessities in nature?”. In

this paper, I follow his lead and show in a similar fashion and detail, how it is 5

possible to give a dissentive answer to: Are there probabilities in nature? This is

achieved by giving a partial analysis – with the aid of Kaplanian pragmatics – of

objective chance in terms of that credence that is reasonable where prevailing

laws and conditions exhaust one’s evidence. This template belongs firmly within

the established Bayesian program of analysing objective chance as ultimate 10

belief. Its contribution to that program is the same as van Fraassen’s contribution

to the empiricist program of analysing physical necessity; namely, it demonstrates the logical possibility of such an analysis. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
objective probability, physical necessity, van Fraassen, empiricism
in
Metaphysica
volume
15
issue
1
pages
69 - 84
publisher
Springer
external identifiers
  • scopus:84898960970
ISSN
1437-2053
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
010ba82a-6813-49a3-b8d5-8b5c2d79d7d0 (old id 4228416)
date added to LUP
2014-01-10 13:51:48
date last changed
2017-01-01 03:43:19
@article{010ba82a-6813-49a3-b8d5-8b5c2d79d7d0,
  abstract     = {In 1977 van Fraassen showed convincingly, and in detail, how one can<br/><br>
give a dissentive answer to the question “[a]re there necessities in nature?”. In<br/><br>
this paper, I follow his lead and show in a similar fashion and detail, how it is 5<br/><br>
possible to give a dissentive answer to: Are there probabilities in nature? This is<br/><br>
achieved by giving a partial analysis – with the aid of Kaplanian pragmatics – of<br/><br>
objective chance in terms of that credence that is reasonable where prevailing<br/><br>
laws and conditions exhaust one’s evidence. This template belongs firmly within<br/><br>
the established Bayesian program of analysing objective chance as ultimate 10<br/><br>
belief. Its contribution to that program is the same as van Fraassen’s contribution<br/><br>
to the empiricist program of analysing physical necessity; namely, it demonstrates the logical possibility of such an analysis.},
  author       = {Masterton, George},
  issn         = {1437-2053},
  keyword      = {objective probability,physical necessity,van Fraassen,empiricism},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {1},
  pages        = {69--84},
  publisher    = {Springer},
  series       = {Metaphysica},
  title        = {The Only Probability is Verbal Probability},
  volume       = {15},
  year         = {2014},
}