Abstract
In this paper, I argue that the probability model used to infer irrationality for the subjects in the famous Linda problem is not appropriate, and I suggest different approaches based on fuzzy reasoning models. My line of argument is two-fold: 1) If the term “probability” is understood properly (mathematically), then the experimenters used the wrong model. 2) If the term “probability” is understood casually (non- mathematically), then alternative models perhaps should be used to justify the subjects’ responses. The objective is to experiment with new ways of looking at irrationality and raise a discussion regarding the relation between irrationality, reasoning errors and logical models that are used as frameworks to study irrationality.||In this paper, I argue that the probability model used to infer irrationality for the subjects in the famous Linda problem is not appropriate, and I suggest different approaches based on fuzzy reasoning models. My line of argument is two-fold: 1) If the term “probability” is understood properly (mathematically), then the experimenters used the wrong model. 2) If the term “probability” is understood casually (non- mathematically), then alternative models perhaps should be used to justify the subjects’ responses. The objective is to experiment with new ways of looking at irrationality and raise a discussion regarding the relation between irrationality, reasoning errors and logical models that are used as frameworks to study irrationality.
| Original language | American English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 329-336 |
| Journal | Open Journal of Philosophy |
| Volume | 3 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| State | Published - 2013 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Irrationality Re-Examined: A Few Comments on the Conjunction Fallacy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver