3 ms·
Does is somehow imply that the Dutch book argument is better developed than Cox's argument?
by kgwgk 5y ago
Does is somehow imply that the Dutch book argument is better developed than Cox's argument?
- spekcular 5y agoYou asked, "Why don't you consider Cox's theorem - and related arguments - well-developed?" I consider Cox's argument not well-developed because D–S theory shows the postulates miss useful and important alternatives. So it fails as an argument for a particular interpretation of probability.
- kgwgk 5y agoI quoted 13415 saying that the only well-developed arguments were […] and asked him why didn’t he consider […] well-developed - compared to the former. I apologize if the scope of the question was not clear.