The problem with probability

IF 0.6 3区 经济学 Q4 ECONOMICS Journal of Post Keynesian Economics Pub Date : 2023-07-03 DOI:10.1080/01603477.2023.2222707
Donald W. Katzner
{"title":"The problem with probability","authors":"Donald W. Katzner","doi":"10.1080/01603477.2023.2222707","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Knightian uncertainty is the circumstance in which there is not enough information available to quantitatively measure in terms of probability the uncertainty that is present. Economic decision makers usually face that kind of uncertainty when attempting to determine their best route forward into the future. But instead of confronting Knightian uncertainty head on, economists generally have assumed it away by opting instead to employ what Knight called risk as measured by probability. But there are serious questions about whether probability has the capacity to coral in a meaningful way the uncertainty many decision makers actually face, and whether its use in models of decision making provides an appropriately relevant and realistic explanation of what is going on. This paper argues that it does not by examining the meaning of the probability concept as it relates to the true uncertain environment the decision maker faces. It also suggests that the alternative measure of surprise introduced by Shackle not only returns such analyses to the more realistic realm of Knightian uncertainty, but is also a workable and suitable replacement for probability in explanations of decision making that need to account for the unpredictability of the future.","PeriodicalId":47197,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Post Keynesian Economics","volume":"46 1","pages":"379 - 399"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Post Keynesian Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01603477.2023.2222707","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Abstract Knightian uncertainty is the circumstance in which there is not enough information available to quantitatively measure in terms of probability the uncertainty that is present. Economic decision makers usually face that kind of uncertainty when attempting to determine their best route forward into the future. But instead of confronting Knightian uncertainty head on, economists generally have assumed it away by opting instead to employ what Knight called risk as measured by probability. But there are serious questions about whether probability has the capacity to coral in a meaningful way the uncertainty many decision makers actually face, and whether its use in models of decision making provides an appropriately relevant and realistic explanation of what is going on. This paper argues that it does not by examining the meaning of the probability concept as it relates to the true uncertain environment the decision maker faces. It also suggests that the alternative measure of surprise introduced by Shackle not only returns such analyses to the more realistic realm of Knightian uncertainty, but is also a workable and suitable replacement for probability in explanations of decision making that need to account for the unpredictability of the future.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
概率的问题
摘要:奈特不确定性是指没有足够的信息可用来以概率的方式定量测量存在的不确定性。经济决策者在试图确定通往未来的最佳路线时,通常会面临这种不确定性。但是,经济学家们并没有正面面对奈特式的不确定性,而是选择采用奈特所谓的以概率来衡量风险的方法,将其假设掉。但是,关于概率是否有能力以一种有意义的方式掩盖许多决策者实际面临的不确定性,以及它在决策模型中的应用是否为正在发生的事情提供了适当的相关和现实的解释,这些都是严重的问题。本文认为,它不是通过检查概率概念的含义,因为它关系到决策者所面临的真正的不确定环境。它还表明,沙克尔引入的另一种度量惊喜的方法不仅将这种分析回归到更现实的奈特不确定性领域,而且在解释需要考虑未来不可预测性的决策时,也是一种可行的、合适的替代概率的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The Journal of Post Keynesian Economics is a scholarly journal of innovative theoretical and empirical work that sheds fresh light on contemporary economic problems. It is committed to the principle that cumulative development of economic theory is only possible when the theory is continuously subjected to scrutiny in terms of its ability both to explain the real world and to provide a reliable guide to public policy.
期刊最新文献
Joseph Schumpeter, Allyn Young, and the future of capitalism Extending the “principle of effective demand” – did Keynes produce an ad hoc tautology? An empirical analysis of the relationship between real wage appreciation and inflation in Brazil Medical expenditures and the measurement of poverty in the United States Theorizing the process of financialization through the paradox of profit: the credit-debt reproduction mechanism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1