BEGIN:VCALENDAR
PRODID:-//Grails iCalendar plugin//NONSGML Grails iCalendar plugin//EN
VERSION:2.0
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20260404T171911Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20140120T121500
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20140120T134500
SUMMARY:Acccuracy\, Risk\, and the Principle of Indifference
UID:20260404T221508Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-f5d4878dd-4s97k
TZID:Europe/London
LOCATION:London\, United Kingdom
DESCRIPTION:<p>Richard Pettigrew\, Reader in the Department of Philosophy at the University<br> of Bristol<br> <br> Title: Accuracy\, Risk\, and the Principle of Indifference<br> <br> Abstract: &nbsp\;In Bayesian epistemology\, the problem of the priors is this: &nbsp\;How<br> should we set our credences (or degrees of belief) in the absence of<br> evidence? &nbsp\;The Principle of Indifference gives a very restrictive answer.<br> It demands that an agent with no evidence divide her credences equally over<br> all possibilities. &nbsp\;That is\, she ought to adopt the uniform distribution.<br> In this paper\, I offer a novel argument for the Principle of Indifference.<br> I call it the Argument from Accuracy. &nbsp\;It shares much in common with Jim<br> Joyce's ''nonpragmatic vindication of probabilism'' (Joyce 1998). &nbsp\;Joyce<br> showed that\, for a broad range of accuracy measures\, if an agent's credences<br> do not satisfy the axioms of probability\, then there are credences that do<br> satisfy those axioms that are guaranteed to be more accurate. &nbsp\;In my<br> argument\, I show that if an agent's credence do not satisfy the Principle of<br> Indifference\, then\, for a similarly broad range of accuracy measures\, they<br> risk greater inaccuracy than they need to.<br> <br> The talk is at 5.15 pm in the seminar room on the second floor of the<br> Lakatos building at the London School of Economics. All welcome!</p>
ORGANIZER:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR
