Attitudes Toward Epistemic Risk and the Value of Experiments

Author: Fallis, Don

Source: Studia Logica, Volume 86, Number 2, July 2007 , pp. 215-246(32)

Publisher: Springer

Buy & download fulltext article:

OR

Price: $47.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)

Abstract:

Several different Bayesian models of epistemic utilities (see, e.g., [37], [24], [40], [46]) have been used to explain why it is rational for scientists to perform experiments. In this paper, I argue that a model–suggested independently by Patrick Maher [40] and Graham Oddie [46]–that assigns epistemic utility to degrees of belief in hypotheses provides the most comprehensive explanation. This is because this proper scoring rule (PSR) model captures a wider range of scientifically acceptable attitudes toward epistemic risk than the other Bayesian models that have been proposed. I also argue, however, that even the PSR model places unreasonably tight restrictions on a scientist’s attitude toward epistemic risk. As a result, such Bayesian models of epistemic utilities fail as normative accounts–not just as descriptive accounts (see, e.g., [31], [14])–of scientific inquiry.

Keywords: Bayesianism; Categorical belief; Degrees of belief; Epistemic risk; Epistemic utility; Proper scoring rule; Scientific experiment

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11225-007-9060-y

Affiliations: Email: fallis@email.arizona.edu

Publication date: July 1, 2007

Related content

Key

Free Content
Free content
New Content
New content
Open Access Content
Open access content
Subscribed Content
Subscribed content
Free Trial Content
Free trial content

Text size:

A | A | A | A
Share this item with others: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. print icon Print this page