Bayesian Informal Logic and Fallacy

نویسنده

  • Kevin Korb
چکیده

Bayesian reasoning has been applied formally to statistical inference, machine learning and analysing scientific method. Here I apply it informally to more common forms of inference, namely natural language arguments. I analyse a variety of traditional fallacies, deductive, inductive and causal, and find more merit in them than is generally acknowledged. Bayesian principles provide a framework for understanding ordinary arguments which is well worth developing. Resume: On a applique la theorie de probabilite de Bayes aux raisonnements statistiques, aux sciences informatiques, et it I'analyse de la methode scientifique. J'elargis son champ d' application it I 'analyse d'arguments courants qu'on trouve dans Ie langage ordinaire, et des sophismes traditionnels, deductifs et inductifs. J e trouve en certains de ces sophismes un bien-fonde qui n' est generalement pas reconnu. La theorie de Bayes nous donne une far;:on de com prendre des arguments ordinaires, et une telle application merite d'etre developpee davantage.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

How Convinced Should We Be by Negative Evidence?

Since John Locke, the so-called argument from ignorance has been considered to be a fallacy, and is widely represented in informal logic textbooks as an example of incorrect reasoning. This might seem surprising to researchers in many scientific disciplines who routinely draw inferences from negative evidence. Oaksford and Hahn (2004) argued that this discrepancy can be explained within a Bayes...

متن کامل

Historical Origins of Argumentum ad Consequentiam

What are the historical origins of the argumentum ad consequentiam, the argument from (or literally, to) consequences, sometimes featured as an informal fallacy in logic textbooks? As shown in this paper, knowledge of the argument can be traced back to Aristotle (who did not treat it as a fallacy, but as a reasonable argument). And this type of argument shows a spotty history of recognition in ...

متن کامل

The Bayesian Logic of the Conjunction Fallacy: Effects of Probabilities and Frequencies in Contingency Tables

In this paper a Bayesian logic of the conjunction fallacy (CF) is advocated as a normative and descriptive proposal for testing hypotheses about dyadic logical connectors. According to traditional extensional probability a violation of additivity and, in particular, a violation of P(A) ≥ P(A ∧ B) or of P(Linda is a bank teller) ≥ P(Linda is a bank teller AND an active feminist) is a fallacy. Th...

متن کامل

Circular Arguments, Begging the Question and the Formalization of Argument Strength

Recently Oaksford and Hahn (2004) proposed a Bayesian reconstruction of a classic argumentation fallacy Locke’s ‘argument from ignorance.’ Here this account is extended to what is probably the most well-known of all argumentation fallacies: circular reasoning or ‘begging the question’. A Bayesian analysis is shown to clarify when and where circular reasoning is good or bad, and how seeming para...

متن کامل

On a General Bayesian Pattern Logic of Frequency-Based Logical Inclusion Fallacies

Bayesian logic provides a rational model of probability judgments deviating from the standard extensional norm of extensional probability. It formalizes the general idea of an inductive pattern logic that may resolve paradoxes of inclusion. Bayesian logic predicts that it should be possible to generalize the phenomenon of frequency-based logical conjunction fallacies to a system of logical incl...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره   شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2002