Advertisement

Problems With Priors in Probabilistic Measures of Coherence

  • David H. Glass

Abstract

Two of the probabilistic measures of coherence discussed in this paper take probabilistic dependence into account and so depend on prior probabilities in a fundamental way. An example is given which suggests that this prior-dependence can lead to potential problems. Another coherence measure is shown to be independent of prior probabilities in a clearly defined sense and consequently is able to avoid such problems. The issue of prior-dependence is linked to the fact that the first two measures can be understood as measures of coherence as striking agreement, while the third measure represents coherence as agreement. Thus, prior (in)dependence can be used to distinguish different conceptions of coherence.

Keywords

Probabilistic Measure Conditional Probability Prior Probability Neutral Point Factual Support 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akiba, K.: 2000, ‘Shogenji’,s Probabilistic Measure of Coherence Is Incoherent’, Analysis 60, 356–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bovens, L. and S. Hartmann: 2003, Bayesian Epistemology, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  3. Bovens, L. and E. J. Olsson: 2000, ‘Coherentism, Reliability and Bayesian Networks’, Mind 109, 685–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fitelson, B.: 2003, ‘A Probabilistic Theory of Coherence’, Analysis 63, 194–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Glass, D. H.: 2002, ‘Coherence, Explanation and Bayesian Networks’, Proceedings of the 13th Irish Conference in Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science, edited by M. O’,Neill et al., Lecture Notes in AI 2646, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 177–182.Google Scholar
  6. Kemeny, J. G. and P. Oppenheim: 1952, ‘Degrees of Factual Support’, Philosophy of Science 19, 307–324.Google Scholar
  7. Olsson, E. J.: 2001, ‘Why Coherence Is Not Truth-Conducive’, Analysis 61, 236–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Olsson, E. J.: 2002, ‘What Is the Problem of Coherence and Truth?, The Journal of Philosophy 99(5), 246–272.Google Scholar
  9. Shogenji, T.: 1999, ‘Is Coherence Truth-Conducive?’, Analysis 59, 338–345.Google Scholar
  10. Shogenji, T.: 2001, ‘Reply to Akiba on the Probabilistic Measure of Coherence, Analysis 61, 147–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Siebel, M.: 2004, On Fitelson’s Measure of Coherence’, Analysis 64, 189–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • David H. Glass
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computing and MathematicsUniversity of UlsterAntrimUK

Personalised recommendations