A forward looking decision rule for imprecise credences

Rohan Sud*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Adam Elga (Philosophers' Imprint, 10(5), 1-11, 2010) presents a diachronic puzzle to supporters of imprecise credences and argues that no acceptable decision rule for imprecise credences can deliver the intuitively correct result. Elga concludes that agents should not hold imprecise credences. In this paper, I argue for a two-part thesis. First, I show that Elga's argument is incomplete: there is an acceptable decision rule that delivers the intuitive result. Next, I repair the argument by offering a more elaborate diachronic puzzle that is more difficult for imprecise Bayesians to avoid.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)119-139
Number of pages21
JournalPhilosophical Studies
Volume167
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A forward looking decision rule for imprecise credences'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this