scholarly journals The propensity interpretation of probability and diagnostic split in explaining away

2020 ◽  
Vol 121 ◽  
pp. 101293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marko Tešić ◽  
Alice Liefgreen ◽  
David Lagnado
Keyword(s):  
Interpretation Of Probability ◽  
Propensity Interpretation

Popper and the Quantum Theory

1995 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
pp. 163-176
Author(s):  
Michael Redhead
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Mechanics ◽  
Quantum Theory ◽  
Quantum Logic ◽  
Scientific Discovery ◽  
Von Neumann ◽  
Interpretation Of Probability ◽  
Propensity Interpretation

Popper wrote extensively on the quantum theory. In Logic der Forschung (LSD) he devoted a whole chapter to the topic, while the whole of Volume 3 of the Postscript to the Logic of Scientific Discovery is devoted to the quantum theory. This volume entitled Quantum Theory and the Schism in Physics (QTSP) incorporated a famous earlier essay, ‘Quantum Mechanics without “the Observer”’ (QM). In addition Popper's development of the propensity interpretation of probability was much influenced by his views on the role of probability in quantum theory, and he also wrote an insightful critique of the 1936 paper of Birkhoff and von Neumann on nondistributive quantum logic (BNIQM).

The Propensity Interpretation

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Gillies
Keyword(s):  
Single Case ◽  
Statistical Testing ◽  
Interpretation Of Probability ◽  
Long Run ◽  
Propensity Interpretation ◽  
Single Case Propensity ◽  
Case Propensity

The propensity interpretation of probability was introduced by Popper in 1957, and the chapter begins with a discussion of Popper’s initial account of propensities and a comparison with Peirce’s related ideas. The original propensity interpretation had a number of strands, some of which could be accepted while others were rejected. This meant that the propensity interpretation could be, and was, developed in different ways by different philosophers of science. One point at issue was whether propensities were objective probabilities of single events. This led to a distinction between (i) single-case propensity theories, and (ii) long-run propensity theories. Another problem concerned the relation between propensities and causes – if propensities had a causal import, because of what is known as the Humphreys’ paradox they might not satisfy the standard axioms of probability. The chapter concludes by discussing how propensities might be connected to observed frequencies via the theory of statistical testing.

Probability in Biology

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberta Millstein
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Computer Simulations ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Relative Fitness ◽  
Mismatch Problem ◽  
Interpretation Of Probability ◽  
Propensity Interpretation ◽  
Causal Concept ◽  
What Matters

I examine the concept of “fitness” in the philosophy of evolutionary biology to show how discussions of probability in biology can go wrong, and right. Many of the critiques of the propensity interpretation of fitness have focused on the mathematical aspects of fitness; re-focusing on several aspects of the propensity interpretation of probability more generally can help to address these concerns. I conclude with some general lessons for thinking about probability in biology. The propensity interpretation of fitness, properly understood, solves the explanatory circularity problem and the mismatch problem, andalso withstands many other problems. Fitness is the propensity for organisms to survive and reproduce in particular environments and in particular populations. Fitness values can be described in terms of distributions of propensities and can be modeled for any number of generations using computer simulations. Fitness is a causal concept. Relative fitness is what matters for natural selection.

Propensities May Satisfy Bayes’s Theorem

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Miller
Keyword(s):  
Correct Interpretation ◽  
Interpretation Of Probability ◽  
Points Of Interest ◽  
Bayes’S Theorem ◽  
Propensity Interpretation ◽  
Bayes's Theorem

This chapter discusses the question of whether the propensity interpretation of probability is a genuine interpretation of the calculus of probability. One of the main points of interest can be found in the difficulty of understanding the term P(A\C), when the occurrence A is temporally or causally anterior to the occurrence C. The chapter is able to determine that an intelligible interpretation of the calculus of probability as a calculus of propensities exists. Although it is not obviously a correct interpretation, it is a factual matter whether propensities obey the calculus of probability.

Propensities and Indeterminism

1995 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
pp. 121-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Miller
Keyword(s):  
Interpretation Of Probability ◽  
Propensity Interpretation

In these prefatory remarks, which are designed to locate my topic within the complex and wide-stretching field of Popper's thought and writings, I shall not say anything that those familiar with his work will not already know. Moreover, what I do say will take as understood many of the problems and theories, not to mention the terminology, that I shall later be doing my best to make understandable. My apologies are therefore due equally to those who know something about Popper's discussions of indeterminism and of the propensity interpretation of probability, and to those who know nothing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document