【摘要】：經(jīng)典荷蘭賭論證表明:如果當(dāng)事人的不確定信念度賦值不滿足概率論公理,那么他在某一賭局中總是輸。然而該論斷并沒有揭示荷蘭賭的含義。文章基于拉姆齊的概念和公理,首先論證存在一個效用函數(shù),它合理地表達了價值的定性概念,然后論證信念度的性質(zhì)。這些概念的性質(zhì)表明,所謂不確定信念系統(tǒng)的一致性是指價值與信念度的賦值和偏好的序關(guān)系是一致的。荷蘭賭論證意味著,在當(dāng)事人的不確定信念系統(tǒng)中,有關(guān)定性和定量概念之間沒有協(xié)調(diào)性:其價值和信念度賦值是混亂的,并導(dǎo)致非理性決策。在這種情形下,當(dāng)事人不確定信念系統(tǒng)的一致性將遭到破壞。由此可見,通過闡明荷蘭賭論證的含義,我們可以為歸納和決策做出辯護。
[Abstract]:The classical Dutch gambling argument shows that if the party's uncertain belief value is not satisfied with the probability axiom, then he always loses in a certain bet. However, this argument does not reveal the meaning of Dutch gambling. Based on Ramsay's concept and axiom, this paper first proves the existence of a utility function, which reasonably expresses the qualitative concept of value, and then proves the nature of belief degree. The properties of these concepts show that the consistency of the so-called uncertain belief system refers to the consistency of the order of values and preferences of belief degrees. Dutch gambling means that there is no harmony between qualitative and quantitative concepts in the uncertain belief system of the parties: the assignment of values and belief degrees is chaotic and leads to irrational decision-making. In this case, the consistency of the party's uncertain belief system will be undermined. Thus, by clarifying the meaning of Dutch gambling argument, we can defend induction and decision-making.
【作者單位】： 中山大學(xué)邏輯與認(rèn)知研究所哲學(xué)系
【基金】：教育部人文社會科學(xué)研究基地重大項目《歸納邏輯及其應(yīng)用》(項目批準(zhǔn)號05JJD720.40001)
【分類號】：B812

【相似文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 熊衛(wèi);;荷蘭賭論證的含義[J];中山大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2006年05期

2 ;[J];;年期

3 ;[J];;年期

4 ;[J];;年期

5 ;[J];;年期

6 ;[J];;年期

7 ;[J];;年期

8 ;[J];;年期

9 ;[J];;年期

10 ;[J];;年期

，

本文編號：2299710