Jantzen, Benjamin (2012) Piecewise Versus Total Support: How to Deal with Background Information in Likelihood Arguments. In:  Philosophy of Science Assoc. 23rd Biennial Mtg (San Diego, CA) > PSA 2012 Contributed Papers.
This is the latest version of this item.
|PDF - Updated Version |
Download (222Kb) | Preview
The use of the Likelihood Principle as a general tool for assessing rival hypotheses has been criticized for its ambiguous treatment of background information. The LP endorses radically different answers depending on what information is designated as background versus evidence. I argue that once one distinguishes between two questions about evidentiary support, the ambiguity vanishes. I demonstrate this resolution by applying it to a debate over the status of the ‘fine-tuning argument’.
|Export/Citation:||EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII (Chicago style) | HTML Citation | OpenURL|
|Social Networking:|| |
|Item Type:||Conference or Workshop Item (UNSPECIFIED)|
|Additional Information:||Comments welcome.|
|Keywords:||likelihood, fine-tuning, background information, observation selection effect, total evidence|
|Subjects:||General Issues > Confirmation/Induction|
Specific Sciences > Probability/Statistics
General Issues > Science and Religion
|Conferences and Volumes:|| Philosophy of Science Assoc. 23rd Biennial Mtg (San Diego, CA) > PSA 2012 Contributed Papers|
|Depositing User:||Benjamin Jantzen|
|Date Deposited:||12 Nov 2012 23:52|
|Last Modified:||12 Nov 2012 23:52|
Available Versions of this Item
- Piecewise Versus Total Support: How to Deal with Background Information in Likelihood Arguments. (deposited 01 Sep 2010)
- Piecewise Versus Total Support: How to Deal with Background Information in Likelihood Arguments. (deposited 12 Nov 2012 23:52)[Currently Displayed]
Actions (login required)