矛盾吗?什么矛盾?论莱纳德·萨维奇与卡尔·波普尔的简短通信

C. Zappia
{"title":"矛盾吗?什么矛盾?论莱纳德·萨维奇与卡尔·波普尔的简短通信","authors":"C. Zappia","doi":"10.1108/S0743-41542020000038C011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper documents an exchange between Leonard Savage, founder of the subjective probability approach to decision-making, and Karl Popper, advocate of the so-called propensity approach to probability, of which there is no knowledge in the literature on probability theory. Early in 1958, just after being informally tested by Daniel Ellsberg with a test of consistency in decision-making processes that originated the so-called Ellsberg Paradox, Savage was made aware that a similar argument had been put forward by Popper. Popper found it paradoxical that two apparently similar events should be attributed the same subjective probability even though evidence supporting judgement in one case was different than in the other case. On this grounds Popper rejected the subjective probability approach. Inspection of the Savage Papers archived at Yale University Library makes it possible to document Savage’s reaction to Popper, of which there is no evidence in his published writings. Savage wrote to Popper denying that his criticism had paradoxical content and a brief exchange followed. The paper shows that while Savage was unconvinced by Popper’s argument he was not hostile to an axiomatically founded generalization of his theory. \n \nThis draft of the paper, preliminary to that accepted for publication in RHETM, was presented at the STOREP Meeting in Genova (June 2018) and at the THETS Meeting in Oxford (August 2018). Comments by Marcello Basili, George Bent, Jack Birner, Alberto Feduzi, Nicola Giocoli, Harro Maas, Aldo Montesano, Jochen Runde are gratefully acknowledged.","PeriodicalId":127472,"journal":{"name":"DecisionSciRN: Decision Theory (Topic)","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Paradox? What Paradox? On a Brief Correspondence Between Leonard Savage and Karl Popper\",\"authors\":\"C. Zappia\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/S0743-41542020000038C011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper documents an exchange between Leonard Savage, founder of the subjective probability approach to decision-making, and Karl Popper, advocate of the so-called propensity approach to probability, of which there is no knowledge in the literature on probability theory. Early in 1958, just after being informally tested by Daniel Ellsberg with a test of consistency in decision-making processes that originated the so-called Ellsberg Paradox, Savage was made aware that a similar argument had been put forward by Popper. Popper found it paradoxical that two apparently similar events should be attributed the same subjective probability even though evidence supporting judgement in one case was different than in the other case. On this grounds Popper rejected the subjective probability approach. Inspection of the Savage Papers archived at Yale University Library makes it possible to document Savage’s reaction to Popper, of which there is no evidence in his published writings. Savage wrote to Popper denying that his criticism had paradoxical content and a brief exchange followed. The paper shows that while Savage was unconvinced by Popper’s argument he was not hostile to an axiomatically founded generalization of his theory. \\n \\nThis draft of the paper, preliminary to that accepted for publication in RHETM, was presented at the STOREP Meeting in Genova (June 2018) and at the THETS Meeting in Oxford (August 2018). Comments by Marcello Basili, George Bent, Jack Birner, Alberto Feduzi, Nicola Giocoli, Harro Maas, Aldo Montesano, Jochen Runde are gratefully acknowledged.\",\"PeriodicalId\":127472,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"DecisionSciRN: Decision Theory (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"DecisionSciRN: Decision Theory (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/S0743-41542020000038C011\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DecisionSciRN: Decision Theory (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/S0743-41542020000038C011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文记录了主观概率决策方法的创始人Leonard Savage与主张所谓概率倾向方法的Karl Popper之间的一段交流,这种倾向方法在概率论文献中是没有的。1958年初,就在丹尼尔·埃尔斯伯格(Daniel Ellsberg)用所谓的埃尔斯伯格悖论(Ellsberg Paradox)对决策过程的一致性进行非正式测试之后,萨维奇意识到波普尔也提出了类似的论点。波普尔发现,两个明显相似的事件被归为相同的主观概率是自相矛盾的,尽管支持其中一个案件判断的证据与另一个案件不同。基于此,波普尔拒绝了主观概率方法。查阅耶鲁大学图书馆存档的萨维奇论文,可以记录萨维奇对波普尔的反应,而在他发表的作品中没有证据表明这一点。萨维奇写信给波普尔,否认他的批评有自相矛盾的内容,随后进行了简短的交流。这篇论文表明,虽然萨维奇不相信波普尔的论点,但他并不反对波普尔的理论的公理化基础概括。该论文初稿是在RHETM上发表的初稿,已在热那亚的STOREP会议(2018年6月)和牛津的THETS会议(2018年8月)上发表。感谢马塞洛·巴西利、乔治·本特、杰克·伯纳、阿尔贝托·费都齐、尼古拉·吉奥科利、哈罗·马斯、阿尔多·蒙特萨诺、约亨·伦德的评论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Paradox? What Paradox? On a Brief Correspondence Between Leonard Savage and Karl Popper
This paper documents an exchange between Leonard Savage, founder of the subjective probability approach to decision-making, and Karl Popper, advocate of the so-called propensity approach to probability, of which there is no knowledge in the literature on probability theory. Early in 1958, just after being informally tested by Daniel Ellsberg with a test of consistency in decision-making processes that originated the so-called Ellsberg Paradox, Savage was made aware that a similar argument had been put forward by Popper. Popper found it paradoxical that two apparently similar events should be attributed the same subjective probability even though evidence supporting judgement in one case was different than in the other case. On this grounds Popper rejected the subjective probability approach. Inspection of the Savage Papers archived at Yale University Library makes it possible to document Savage’s reaction to Popper, of which there is no evidence in his published writings. Savage wrote to Popper denying that his criticism had paradoxical content and a brief exchange followed. The paper shows that while Savage was unconvinced by Popper’s argument he was not hostile to an axiomatically founded generalization of his theory. This draft of the paper, preliminary to that accepted for publication in RHETM, was presented at the STOREP Meeting in Genova (June 2018) and at the THETS Meeting in Oxford (August 2018). Comments by Marcello Basili, George Bent, Jack Birner, Alberto Feduzi, Nicola Giocoli, Harro Maas, Aldo Montesano, Jochen Runde are gratefully acknowledged.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Paradox? What Paradox? On a Brief Correspondence Between Leonard Savage and Karl Popper
×
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