Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Review
Author(s): Jordan Howard Sobel
Review by: Jordan Howard Sobel
Source: Mind, New Series, Vol. 112, No. 447 (Jul., 2003), pp. 521-525
Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of the Mind Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3489201
Accessed: 27-03-2015 02:16 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Oxford University Press and Mind Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Mind.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 140.209.2.26 on Fri, 27 Mar 2015 02:16:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BookReviews 521
wouldwellserare
beginninggraduatestudentsadequately
versedin contemporaryepistemology
andshouldbe especiallywelcomeforthat.Atthesametime
importantinterpretative
issuesarethoroughlyexplored.Andallthisis donein
a friendlyand readablestyle.A considerableachievementis beforeus and
hopefullya furthersignificant
boostto thenumberof seriousstudentsof Reid.
Departmentof Philosophy
UniversityofAberdeen
Old Brewery
OldAberdeenAB243UB
Scotland
ROGER GALLIE
2002,
This content downloaded from 140.209.2.26 on Fri, 27 Mar 2015 02:16:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
522 BookReviews
specifically
the processof hypothesisH thatsaysthatI generated
E by flipping
a faircoin1ootimes which,let us agree,wouldhavebeena 'randomchance
process' andrecordingin theorderof theirappearances
eachheadby '1'and
eachtailby 'o'.According
to the theoryof Dembski'sbook,you couldbe entitledto eliminatethishypothesisin oneof thefollowingways.Fromthewaysof
theseeliminationscanbe seen(i) somethingof the complexity
anddiffcultyof
chanceeliminationsconductedaccordingto thebook,and(ii) howeasyit can
be forsomeonewhohasgottenthehangof themto eliminatechancehypotheses.
Elimination
bya possibleprediction'Youbringto mindthe 'information'
I
thatthe stringS occursin a bookpublishedby Cambridge
UniversityPressin
1998.'Information'
forpurposesof a ChanceElimination
Argumentneednot
be true (p. 147),thoughas it happensthis informationis true.Settingaside
yourknowledgeof the orderof o'sand1'S in the stringof E (lookingawayand
pretendingto forgetit), you assume(p. 146),you pretend(p. 143),thatI containsinformationconcerningthis order,andcomeup withthe ideathatthe
publicationof S in 1998'predicted'the stringin E at leastin the Pickwickian
sensethat'[a] subject... exhibited'(p. 160)it in advancewithoutpredictive
intent.Holdingthatthought,you formulatea description
D that'delimits'the
stringin E (pp.136-7).Formulating
evena matchingdescriptionis in thiscase
easy,it is 'tractable'.
It canbe simplycopying(pp.159-60).
Summingup so far:DescriptionD 'specifies'
E, forD 'delimits'E, andD is
for you 'tractable'
givenI. Tothis canbe addedthatE is for H conditionally
independentof I (p. 145):Prob(E/H& I) = Prob(E/H).Random-chance
hypothesisH 'screensoff)thisI fromE. (It doesnot, DavidLewismightcaution,screenoff every'information'
thatmightcometo mind.Youcouldbring
to mindthe 'information'
thatthe stringS resultedfromthe random-chance
processof H.) Togeton withthe eliminationof H forE, to getinto a particularlydifficultstageof itsreasoning,let me tellyouthataccording
to yourneeds
andinterests,andespeciallyhowimportantit is to you to avoida 'falsenegative'here,you look into the conditionalprobability
not of a D on H to determinewhetherit is 'smallenough',butof Ds on Hs, certain'generalizations'
of
D and(I addwithoutprejudice)H. In Dembski's
termsyouidentify'probabilisticresources'
thatyourneedsandinterests(pp.175ff.,185and19l)make'relevant'in this case.These'relevant'resourcesaretermsof Ds andHs which
'factorthemin'.Thelessimportanta falsenegativein the caseis foryou, the
greaterrelevant'probabilistic
resources'
and'saturations'.
(Pp.183-4.)Letyour
needsandinterestsmakethe avoidanceof a falsenegativein thiscaseofalmost
no importance,you could careless, but not much less:let this stipulation
regardingyourneedsandinterestsmakeappropriate
forDs the presentation
of the stringin E anywhere
andanytimein space-time,andforHs the generation of length-loostringsbyprocessesthatagreein theirchanceswiththoseof
coinflips.Youfind,let us assume,thatthe probability
of a Ds conditionalon
Hs is still smallenoughby the standardof ChanceEliminationArguments,
This content downloaded from 140.209.2.26 on Fri, 27 Mar 2015 02:16:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BookReviews 523
...;
D98:Ih-tl= 98.
This content downloaded from 140.209.2.26 on Fri, 27 Mar 2015 02:16:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
524 BookReviews
This content downloaded from 140.209.2.26 on Fri, 27 Mar 2015 02:16:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BookReviews 525
This content downloaded from 140.209.2.26 on Fri, 27 Mar 2015 02:16:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions