Who’s Afraid of Undermining?
ثبت نشده
چکیده
The Principal Principle (PP) says that, for any proposition A , given any admissible evidence and the proposition that the chance of A is x%, one’s conditional credence in A should be x%. Humean Supervenience (HS) claims that, among possible worlds like ours, no two differ without differing in the spacetime-point-by-spacetime-point arrangement of local properties. David Lewis (1986b, 1994) has argued that PP contradicts HS, and his argument has been accepted by Bigelow, Collins, and Pargetter (1993), Thau (1994), Hall (1994), Strevens (1995), Ismael (1996), and Hoefer (1997). Against this consensus, I argue that PP need not contradict HS.
منابع مشابه
WHO’S AFRAID OF UNDERMINING? Why the Principal Principle might not contradict Humean Supervenience
The Principal Principle (PP) says that, for any proposition A, given any admissible evidence and the proposition that the chance of A is x%, one’s conditional credence in A should be x%. Humean Supervenience (HS) claims that, among possible worlds like ours, no two differ without differing in the spacetime-point-by-spacetime-point arrangement of local properties. David Lewis (1986b, 1994a) has ...
متن کاملWho’s Afraid of Nagelian Reduction?
We reconsider the Nagelian theory of reduction and argue that, contrary to a widely held view, it is the right analysis of intertheoretic reduction. The alleged difficulties of the theory either vanish upon closer inspection or turn out to be substantive philosophical questions rather than knock-down arguments.
متن کاملBehavioral Neuroscience: Who’s Afraid of the C57BL/6 Mouse?
Behavioral paradigms in which laboratory rodents express behaviors that their wild counterparts presumably need every day are rare: a novel prey-capture model for laboratory mice has been developed for examining the neurophysiological underpinnings of prey capture in mice.
متن کاملWho’s Afraid of a Poor Old-Age? Risk Perception in Risk Management Decisions
Pension Research Council Working Papers are intended to make research findings available to other researchers in preliminary form, to encourage discussion and suggestions for revision before final publication. Opinions are solely those of the authors. This paper is to appear in Money Matters: Shaping Retirement Decisionmaking (forthcoming). Edited by Olivia S. Mitchell and Stephen P. Utkus. Oxf...
متن کاملWho’s afraid of aggregating money metrics?∗
We provide an axiomatic justification to aggregate money metrics. The key axiom requires the approval of richer-to-poorer transfers that preserve the overall efficiency of the distribution. This transfer principle, together with the basic axioms anonymity, continuity, monotonicity, and a version of welfarism, characterizes a standard social welfare function defined over money metric utilities.
متن کامل