2,950 research outputs found
Imprecise Bayesianism and Global Belief Inertia
Traditional Bayesianism requires that an agentâs degrees of belief be represented by a real-valued, probabilistic credence function. However, in many cases it seems that our evidence is not rich enough to warrant such precision. In light of this, some have proposed that we instead represent an agentâs degrees of belief as a set of credence functions. This way, we can respect the evidence by requiring that the set, often called the agentâs credal state, includes all credence functions that are in some sense compatible with the evidence. One known problem for this evidentially motivated imprecise view is that in certain cases, our imprecise credence in a particular proposition will remain the same no matter how much evidence we receive. In this article I argue that the problem is much more general than has been appreciated so far, and that itâs difficult to avoid it without compromising the initial evidentialist motivation. _1_ Introduction _2_ Precision and Its Problems _3_ Imprecise Bayesianism and Respecting Ambiguous Evidence _4_ Local Belief Inertia _5_ From Local to Global Belief Inertia _6_ Responding to Global Belief Inertia _7_ Conclusio
Failure to Delegate and Loss of Control
This paper provides an explanation for the frequently observed phenomenon of âinefficient micromanagementâ. I show that a supervisor may get comprehensively involved into activities of a subordinate although a better option of delegation is available. This inefficiency persists in the absence of conflict of preferences and even as the cost of delegation becomes zero. The paper also demonstrates that imposing constraints on communication with a subordinate can be beneficial for a superior
Robust Estimators under the Imprecise Dirichlet Model
Walley's Imprecise Dirichlet Model (IDM) for categorical data overcomes
several fundamental problems which other approaches to uncertainty suffer from.
Yet, to be useful in practice, one needs efficient ways for computing the
imprecise=robust sets or intervals. The main objective of this work is to
derive exact, conservative, and approximate, robust and credible interval
estimates under the IDM for a large class of statistical estimators, including
the entropy and mutual information.Comment: 16 LaTeX page
Failure to Delegate and Loss of Control
This paper provides an explanation for the frequently observed phenomenon of ââŹĹinefficient micromanagementââŹ. I show that a supervisor may get comprehensively involved into activities of a subordinate although a better option of delegation is available. This inefficiency persists in the absence of conflict of preferences and even as the cost of delegation becomes zero. The paper also demonstrates that imposing constraints on communication with a subordinate can be beneficial for a superior.
Cluelessness
Decisions, whether moral or prudential, should be guided at least in part by considerations of the consequences that would result from the various available actions. For any given action, however, the majority of its consequences are unpredictable at the time of decision. Many have worried that this leaves us, in some important sense, clueless. In this paper, I distinguish between âsimpleâ and âcomplexâ possible sources of cluelessness. In terms of this taxonomy, the majority of the existing literature on cluelessness focusses on the simple sources. I argue, contra James Lenman in particular, that these would-be sources of cluelessness are unproblematic, on the grounds that indifference-based reasoning is far less problematic than Lenman (along with many others) supposes. However, there does seem to be a genuine phenomenon of cluelessness associated with the âcomplexâ sources; here, indifference-based reasoning is inapplicable by anyoneâs lights. This âcomplex problem of cluelessnessâ is vivid and pressing, in particular, in the context of Effective Altruism. This motivates a more thorough examination of the precise nature of cluelessness, and the precise source of the associated phenomenology of discomfort in forced-choice situations. The latter parts of the paper make some initial explorations in those directions
Evidentialism, Inertia, and Imprecise Probability
Evidentialists say that a necessary condition of sound epistemic reasoning is that our beliefs reflect only our evidence. This thesis arguably conflicts with standard Bayesianism, due to the importance of prior probabilities in the latter. Some evidentialists have responded by modelling belief-states using imprecise probabilities (Joyce 2005). However, Roger White
(2010) and Aron Vallinder (2018) argue that this Imprecise Bayesianism is incompatible with evidentialism due to âinertiaâ, where Imprecise Bayesian agents become stuck in a state of ambivalence towards hypotheses. Additionally, escapes from inertia apparently only create further conflicts with evidentialism.
This dilemma gives a reason for evidentialist imprecise probabilists to look for alternatives without inertia. I shall argue that Henry E. Kyburgâs approach offers an evidentialist-friendly imprecise probability theory without inertia, and that its relevant anti-inertia features are independently justified. I also connect the traditional epistemological debates concerning the âethics of beliefâ more systematically with formal epistemology than has been hitherto done
- âŚ