What conditional probability could not be

Alan Hájek*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

233 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Kolmogorov's axiomatization of probability includes the familiar ratio formula for conditional probability: (RATIO) P(A | B) = P(A∩B)/P(B) (P(B) > 0). Call this the ratio analysis of conditional probability. It has become so entrenched that it is often referred to as the definition of conditional probability. I argue that it is not even an adequate analysis of that concept. I prove what I call the Four Horn theorem, concluding that every probability assignment has uncountably many 'trouble spots'. Trouble spots come in four varieties: assignments of zero to genuine possibilities; assignments of infinitesimals to such possibilities; vague assignments to such possibilities; and no assignment whatsoever to such possibilities. Each sort of trouble spot can create serious problems for the ratio analysis. I marshal many examples from scientific and philosophical practice against the ratio analysis. I conclude more positively: we should reverse the traditional direction of analysis. Conditional probability should be taken as the primitive notion, and unconditional probability should be analyzed in terms of it.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)273-323
Number of pages51
JournalSynthese
Volume137
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'What conditional probability could not be'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this