IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fan/spespe/vhtml10.3280-spe2018-002003.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Boole, Ramsey and the Keynes-Townshend exchanges on subjective probability

Author

Listed:
  • Rog?rio Arthmar
  • Michael Emmett Brady

Abstract

Contrary to what is accepted in many quarters, John M. Keynes actually rejected Frank Ramsey?s subjective theory of probability, in general. He did accept, though, Ramsey?s betting quotient approach, but only in the special case where the weight of the evidence w equaled 1, so that all the probabilities were linear, additive, single number answers. In general, however, Keynes?s probabilities were indeterminate, that is, interval valued with the characteristic of being non-additive and nonlinear because the weight of evidence w was generally less than 1. The Boolean roots of Keynes?s approach to probability and his often-neglected exchanges with Hugh Townshend in 1937-38 provide strong evidence that Keynes never changed his mind on the subjective approach to probability. It is shown that, for Ramsey, the degree of belief is the confidence a decision maker has in the betting odds while, for Keynes, it is the degree of ?rational? or logical belief based on George Boole?s logic of propositions.

Suggested Citation

  • Rog?rio Arthmar & Michael Emmett Brady, 2018. "Boole, Ramsey and the Keynes-Townshend exchanges on subjective probability," HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT AND POLICY, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(2), pages 55-74.
    • Handle: RePEc:fan:spespe:v:html10.3280/spe2018-002003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.francoangeli.it/riviste/Scheda_Rivista.aspx?IDArticolo=63027&Tipo=ArticoloPDF
    Download Restriction: Single articles can be downloaded buying download credits, for info: https://www.francoangeli.it/DownloadCredit
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Emmett Brady & Rogério Arthmar, 2012. "Keynes, Boole and the interval approach to probability," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 20(3), pages 65-84.
    2. Bateman, Bradley W, 1992. "What We Do with Our Heroes [Is Probability Theory Relevant for Uncertainty? A Post Keynesian Perspective]," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 204-206, Winter.
    3. Carlo Zappia, 2015. "Keynes on Probability and Decision: Evidence from the Correspondence with Hugh Townshend," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 23(2), pages 145-166.
    4. Bateman, Bradley, 1992. "More on Keynes and Probability: Response," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(4), pages 208-208, Fall.
    5. Ken Binmore & Lisa Stewart & Alex Voorhoeve, 2012. "How much ambiguity aversion?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 215-238, December.
    6. Marco Dardi & Mauro Gallegati, 1992. "Alfred Marshall on Speculation," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 24(3), pages 571-594, Fall.
    7. Rogério Arthmar & Michael Emmett Brady, 2016. "The Keynes–Knight and the de Finetti–Savage's Approaches to Probability: An Economic Interpretation," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 24(1), pages 105-124.
    8. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1948. "The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56, pages 279-279.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Richard Arena & Eric Nasica, 2021. "Keynes's Methodology and the Analysis of Economic Agent Behavior in a Complex World," GREDEG Working Papers 2021-10, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    2. Marcello Basili & Carlo Zappia, 2018. "Ellsberg’s Decision Rules and Keynes’s Long-Term Expectations," Department of Economics University of Siena 777, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    3. Carlo Zappia, 2021. "Keynes's Treatise on Probability at 100 Years: Its Most Enduring Message," GREDEG Working Papers 2021-36, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    4. Heineck, Guido & Süssmuth, Bernd, 2013. "A different look at Lenin’s legacy: Social capital and risk taking in the Two Germanies," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 789-803.
    5. Edi Karni & Philippe Mongin, 2000. "On the Determination of Subjective Probability by Choices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 233-248, February.
    6. Christian Johnson & George G Kaufman, 2007. "Un banco, con cualquier otro nombre…," Boletín, CEMLA, vol. 0(4), pages 185-199, Octubre-d.
    7. Roy, Saktinil & Kemme, David M., 2012. "Causes of banking crises: Deregulation, credit booms and asset bubbles, then and now," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 270-294.
    8. Chateauneuf, Alain & Eichberger, Jurgen & Grant, Simon, 2007. "Choice under uncertainty with the best and worst in mind: Neo-additive capacities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 538-567, November.
    9. Nicholas Barberis, 2012. "A Model of Casino Gambling," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 35-51, January.
    10. Hooi Hooi Lean & Michael McAleer & Wing-Keung Wong, 2013. "Risk-averse and Risk-seeking Investor Preferences for Oil Spot and Futures," Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE 2013-31, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico, revised Aug 2013.
    11. Pierre-Charles Pradier, 2006. "De usu artis conjectandi in jure : quid de oeconomia (politica) ?," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00274325, HAL.
    12. Raj Chetty, 2004. "Consumption Commitments, Unemployment Durations, and Local Risk Aversion," NBER Working Papers 10211, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Eeckhoudt, Louis & Schlesinger, Harris, 2008. "Changes in risk and the demand for saving," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(7), pages 1329-1336, October.
    14. Christian Gollier & James Hammitt & Nicolas Treich, 2013. "Risk and choice: A research saga," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 129-145, October.
    15. Martin Kukuk & Stefan Winter, 2008. "An Alternative Explanation of the Favorite-Longshot Bias," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 2(2), pages 79-96, September.
    16. Corgnet, Brice & Hernán-González, Roberto & Kujal, Praveen, 2020. "On booms that never bust: Ambiguity in experimental asset markets with bubbles," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    17. Raymond H. Chan & Ephraim Clark & Xu Guo & Wing-Keung Wong, 2020. "New development on the third-order stochastic dominance for risk-averse and risk-seeking investors with application in risk management," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(2), pages 108-132, June.
    18. Moshe Levy & Haim Levy, 2013. "Prospect Theory: Much Ado About Nothing?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 7, pages 129-144, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    19. Lisa L. Posey & Vickie Bajtelsmit, 2017. "Insurance and Endogenous Bankruptcy Risk: When is it Rational to Choose Gambling, Insurance, and Potential Bankruptcy?," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 42(1), pages 15-40, March.
    20. Evgeny Kagan & Alexander Rybalov, 2022. "Subjective Trusts and Prospects: Some Practical Remarks on Decision Making with Imperfect Information," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-24, March.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • B13 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought through 1925 - - - Neoclassical through 1925 (Austrian, Marshallian, Walrasian, Wicksellian)
    • B16 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought through 1925 - - - Quantitative and Mathematical
    • B31 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought: Individuals - - - Individuals

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fan:spespe:v:html10.3280/spe2018-002003. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Stefania Rosato (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.francoangeli.it/riviste/sommario.aspx?IDRivista=121 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.