235377

(2014) Synthese 191 (5).

Finite additivity, another lottery paradox and conditionalisation

Colin Howson

pp. 989-1012

In this paper I argue that de Finetti provided compelling reasons for rejecting countable additivity. It is ironical therefore that the main argument advanced by Bayesians against following his recommendation is based on the consistency criterion, coherence, he himself developed. I will show that this argument is mistaken. Nevertheless, there remain some counter-intuitive consequences of rejecting countable additivity, and one in particular has all the appearances of a full-blown paradox. I will end by arguing that in fact it is no paradox, and that what it shows is that conditionalisation, often claimed to be integral to the Bayesian canon, has to be rejected as a general rule in a finitely additive environment.

Publication details

DOI: 10.1007/s11229-013-0303-3

Full citation:

Howson, C. (2014). Finite additivity, another lottery paradox and conditionalisation. Synthese 191 (5), pp. 989-1012.

This document is unfortunately not available for download at the moment.