Can you recommend an overview of everything wrong with probabilistic epistemology? I haven’t found one. There’s lots of papers that say “this particular objection is fatal, so why don’t you guys stop pretending,” but maybe no compendium of those?
Collecting all the nearly-fatal objections to probabilistic epistemology in one place would issue a more difficult challenge: can you accommodate all these simultaneously? I don’t want to do this job, but it would be a major service if someone did. (Or has!)
-
-
Courtesy
@ArtirKel, here is a list of eight (nearly?) fatal problems with (Bayesian) probabilism, with brief explanations. It would be great to have something like this, but more comprehensive, and with more discussion. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology-bayesian/#PotPro …Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The SEP for Bayesian epistemology. But it can be rescued by going deeperhttps://academic.oup.com/bjps/article-abstract/60/2/345/1481096 …
-
Thanks! I had read the SEP article; forgot that it does collect objections. It’s not comprehensive, but is a good start! I didn’t know Huemer’s article; will take a look!
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.