Abstract
The point of interpreting events — and then probability — in terms of bets is to get an unmistakable, concrete and operational meaning, valid for any kind of event: in fact betting is conceivable in any circumstance that can be expressed by a sensible proposition, and not only in those corresponding to the classic combinatorial or frequentist evaluations. Moreover, notice that the so-called “subjective view” is based on hypothetical bets: the force of the argument does not depend on whether or not one actually has the possibility or intends to bet. So, even if the above discussion aims at giving a possible “semantic” interpretation of the concept of coherence, nevertheless we may just refer (thanks to the alternative theorem) to the mathematical side of the problem, which rests essentially on the compatibility of system (4.1).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Coletti, G., Scozzafava, R. (2002). Probability Meaning and Assessment: a Reconciliation. In: Probabilistic Logic in a Coherent Setting. Trends in Logic, vol 15. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0474-9_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0474-9_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-0970-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-0474-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive