{"id":11784,"date":"2024-05-20T06:54:25","date_gmt":"2024-05-20T05:54:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/event\/metaphysics-and-logic-seminar-x-fpst-seminar-marta-sznajder-university-of-vienna\/"},"modified":"2024-06-19T10:00:55","modified_gmt":"2024-06-19T09:00:55","slug":"metaphysics-and-logic-seminar-x-fpst-seminar-marta-sznajder-university-of-vienna","status":"publish","type":"tribe_events","link":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/event\/metaphysics-and-logic-seminar-x-fpst-seminar-marta-sznajder-university-of-vienna\/","title":{"rendered":"Metaphysics and Logic Seminar x FPST Seminar: Marta Sznajder (University of Vienna)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong><b>Janina Hosiasson\u2019s logic of rational degrees of belief: subjective probability before and after Ramsey<\/b><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Abstract:<\/p>\n<p>In 1931, Janina Hosiasson-Lindenbaum proposed a proto-decision-theoretic answer to the value of evidence problem, originally posed by C. D. Broad and eventually solved by I. J. Good in the context of Savage\u2019s decision theory. As an influence on her paper she credited Frank Ramsey, whose then unpublished \u201cTruth and Probability\u201d she had read shortly after Ramsey\u2019s death in 1930. But Hosiasson also insisted that she had \u201cpreviously thought independently on similar lines\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>This raises two questions. First, what is it exactly that Hosiasson-Lindenbaum took herself to be in agreement on with Ramsey, or what part of her approach has been inspired by his paper? And second: what\u00a0<i>did<\/i>\u00a0she \u201cpreviously [think] independently\u201d? In the talk, I will try to answer the two questions, drawing on Hosiasson-Lindenbaum\u2019s work published before her contact with Ramsey\u2019s work, as well as shortly after (and which has not received any attention to date).<\/p>\n<p>This reconstruction of Hosiasson\u2019s early philosophical views contributes to our understanding of how the different philosophical interpretations of probability that took shape in the first half of the 20th century developed in their early stages. Hosiasson\u00a0 eventually saw herself as working on the logic of rational degrees of belief, and was not invested in any external justifications of the rules of such logic, especially ones which would ground it through pragmatic arguments. At the same time, while she built on Keynes\u2019s formal results about a posteriori probabilities, Hosiasson does not appear to have taken on board his interpretation of probability as an objective, semantic relation the access to which is direct, but not always possible. Hosiasson turns out to be much closer in her approach to what we have come to think of the late stages of Rudolf Carnap\u2019s inductive logic project\u2014which is an interesting footnote to the history of the field, given the influence that\u00a0<i>late\u00a0<\/i>Hosiassson\u2019s work had on the\u00a0<i>early\u00a0<\/i>inductive logic of Carnap.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Janina Hosiasson\u2019s logic of rational degrees of belief: subjective probability before and after Ramsey Abstract: In 1931, Janina Hosiasson-Lindenbaum proposed a proto-decision-theoretic answer to the value of evidence problem, originally&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_tribe_events_status":"","_tribe_events_status_reason":"","_tribe_events_is_hybrid":"","_tribe_events_is_virtual":"","_tribe_events_virtual_video_source":"","_tribe_events_virtual_embed_video":"","_tribe_events_virtual_linked_button_text":"","_tribe_events_virtual_linked_button":"","_tribe_events_virtual_show_embed_at":"","_tribe_events_virtual_show_embed_to":[],"_tribe_events_virtual_show_on_event":"","_tribe_events_virtual_show_on_views":"","_tribe_events_virtual_url":"","footnotes":""},"tags":[],"tribe_events_cat":[25,27],"class_list":["post-11784","tribe_events","type-tribe_events","status-publish","hentry","tribe_events_cat-metaphysics-and-logic-group","tribe_events_cat-philosophy-social-theory-arche-seminar","cat_metaphysics-and-logic-group","cat_philosophy-social-theory-arche-seminar"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tribe_events\/11784","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tribe_events"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/tribe_events"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tribe_events\/11784\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11868,"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tribe_events\/11784\/revisions\/11868"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11784"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11784"},{"taxonomy":"tribe_events_cat","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tribe_events_cat?post=11784"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}