I.J.古德关于凯恩斯论证的证据权重V(逻辑关系)是一个数字的主张是错误的

M. E. Brady
{"title":"I.J.古德关于凯恩斯论证的证据权重V(逻辑关系)是一个数字的主张是错误的","authors":"M. E. Brady","doi":"10.14505/tpref.v14.1(27).01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"All current assessments of how Keynes’s weight (evidential weight of the argument) concept is measured are erroneously based on a metaphor ignored by I.J. Good, which Keynes used before he presented the mathematical analysis involved in measuring weight in chapter 26 of the A Treatise on Probability, on page 77 of chapter 6 to measure weight. \nKeynes’s chapter 26 is the omega while chapter 6 is the alpha. It is impossible to fully grasp Keynes’s evidential weight of the argument concept, first presented as a logical relation designated as V, which is then measured through the construction of an index of weight in chapter 26, without a detailed study of pp. 310-315 of chapter 26 of the A Treatise on Probability. \nThe misbelief that Keynes ‘s concept of the evidential weight of the evidence, V=V(a/h), in chapter 6 of the A Treatise on Probability, represented a measure of the absolute amount of Knowledge, defined as K by Good to represent a gross measure of weight, can be traced back to numerous book and journal article contributions made by I.J. Good between 1950 and 2000. \nThe most severe errors about chapter 6 of the A Treatise on Probability were repeated again and again by Good from 1950 to 1990 (Good 1950, 1960, 1962, 1965, 1967, 1967, 1968/70, 1970/71, 1975, 1983a, 1983b, 1985, 1988, 1988, Good and Toulmin 1968). \nGood completely overlooked Keynes’s footnote 1 on page 76 of chapter 6 to chapter 26 of the A Treatise on Probability, where Keynes stated that he would discuss how to integrate weight into a discussion of “…the application of probability to practice.” This would require a mathematical analysis and, obviously, would require the restriction that V(a/h)=w, 0≤w≤1, and w is the degree of the completeness of the information so as to be able to combine it with 0≤α≤1, where P(a/h)=α and α is the  probable degree of rational belief.","PeriodicalId":362173,"journal":{"name":"Theoretical and Practical Research in the Economic Fields","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"I.J. Good’s Claim, That Keynes’s Evidential Weight of the Argument, V, a Logical Relation, is a Number, is False\",\"authors\":\"M. E. Brady\",\"doi\":\"10.14505/tpref.v14.1(27).01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"All current assessments of how Keynes’s weight (evidential weight of the argument) concept is measured are erroneously based on a metaphor ignored by I.J. Good, which Keynes used before he presented the mathematical analysis involved in measuring weight in chapter 26 of the A Treatise on Probability, on page 77 of chapter 6 to measure weight. \\nKeynes’s chapter 26 is the omega while chapter 6 is the alpha. It is impossible to fully grasp Keynes’s evidential weight of the argument concept, first presented as a logical relation designated as V, which is then measured through the construction of an index of weight in chapter 26, without a detailed study of pp. 310-315 of chapter 26 of the A Treatise on Probability. \\nThe misbelief that Keynes ‘s concept of the evidential weight of the evidence, V=V(a/h), in chapter 6 of the A Treatise on Probability, represented a measure of the absolute amount of Knowledge, defined as K by Good to represent a gross measure of weight, can be traced back to numerous book and journal article contributions made by I.J. Good between 1950 and 2000. \\nThe most severe errors about chapter 6 of the A Treatise on Probability were repeated again and again by Good from 1950 to 1990 (Good 1950, 1960, 1962, 1965, 1967, 1967, 1968/70, 1970/71, 1975, 1983a, 1983b, 1985, 1988, 1988, Good and Toulmin 1968). \\nGood completely overlooked Keynes’s footnote 1 on page 76 of chapter 6 to chapter 26 of the A Treatise on Probability, where Keynes stated that he would discuss how to integrate weight into a discussion of “…the application of probability to practice.” This would require a mathematical analysis and, obviously, would require the restriction that V(a/h)=w, 0≤w≤1, and w is the degree of the completeness of the information so as to be able to combine it with 0≤α≤1, where P(a/h)=α and α is the  probable degree of rational belief.\",\"PeriodicalId\":362173,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Theoretical and Practical Research in the Economic Fields\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Theoretical and Practical Research in the Economic Fields\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14505/tpref.v14.1(27).01\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theoretical and Practical Research in the Economic Fields","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14505/tpref.v14.1(27).01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目前对凯恩斯的权重(论证的证据权重)概念如何测量的所有评估都错误地基于一个被I.J. Good忽略的隐喻,凯恩斯在《概论》第26章(第6章第77页)中提出测量权重的数学分析之前使用了这个隐喻来测量权重。凯恩斯的第26章是omega,而第6章是alpha。如果没有对《概率论》第26章第310-315页的详细研究,就不可能完全掌握凯恩斯论证概念的证据权重,首先作为一个指定为V的逻辑关系提出,然后通过构建权重指数在第26章进行测量。在《概率论》第6章中,凯恩斯关于证据的证据权重V=V(a/h)的概念代表了知识的绝对数量的度量,定义为K由Good代表重量的总度量,这种误解可以追溯到1950年至2000年期间I.J. Good所做的许多书籍和期刊文章贡献。关于《概率论》第6章最严重的错误在1950年到1990年间被Good一再重复(Good 1950、1960、1962、1965、1967、1967、1968/70、1970/71、1975、1983a、1983b、1985、1988、1988,Good和Toulmin 1968)。Good完全忽略了凯恩斯在《概率论》第6章到第26章76页的脚注,凯恩斯在脚注中表示,他将讨论如何将权重整合到“……概率论在实践中的应用”的讨论中。这将需要进行数学分析,显然,需要限制V(a/h)=w, 0≤w≤1,w是信息的完备度,以便能够将其与0≤α≤1结合起来,其中P(a/h)=α, α是合理信念的可能程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
I.J. Good’s Claim, That Keynes’s Evidential Weight of the Argument, V, a Logical Relation, is a Number, is False
All current assessments of how Keynes’s weight (evidential weight of the argument) concept is measured are erroneously based on a metaphor ignored by I.J. Good, which Keynes used before he presented the mathematical analysis involved in measuring weight in chapter 26 of the A Treatise on Probability, on page 77 of chapter 6 to measure weight. Keynes’s chapter 26 is the omega while chapter 6 is the alpha. It is impossible to fully grasp Keynes’s evidential weight of the argument concept, first presented as a logical relation designated as V, which is then measured through the construction of an index of weight in chapter 26, without a detailed study of pp. 310-315 of chapter 26 of the A Treatise on Probability. The misbelief that Keynes ‘s concept of the evidential weight of the evidence, V=V(a/h), in chapter 6 of the A Treatise on Probability, represented a measure of the absolute amount of Knowledge, defined as K by Good to represent a gross measure of weight, can be traced back to numerous book and journal article contributions made by I.J. Good between 1950 and 2000. The most severe errors about chapter 6 of the A Treatise on Probability were repeated again and again by Good from 1950 to 1990 (Good 1950, 1960, 1962, 1965, 1967, 1967, 1968/70, 1970/71, 1975, 1983a, 1983b, 1985, 1988, 1988, Good and Toulmin 1968). Good completely overlooked Keynes’s footnote 1 on page 76 of chapter 6 to chapter 26 of the A Treatise on Probability, where Keynes stated that he would discuss how to integrate weight into a discussion of “…the application of probability to practice.” This would require a mathematical analysis and, obviously, would require the restriction that V(a/h)=w, 0≤w≤1, and w is the degree of the completeness of the information so as to be able to combine it with 0≤α≤1, where P(a/h)=α and α is the  probable degree of rational belief.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信