My duty in remembering the life and works of Tullio Bagiotti and in discussing his thought is justified for several reasons. I succeeded Bagiotti both in the chair of Political…
Abstract
My duty in remembering the life and works of Tullio Bagiotti and in discussing his thought is justified for several reasons. I succeeded Bagiotti both in the chair of Political Economy at the University of Milan and in the editorship of the Rivista Internazionale di Scienze Economiche e Commerciali (International Review of Economics and Business); and both Bagiotti and I were assistants to Professor Giovanni Demaria at the Bocconi University of Milan. Even though Bagiotti was teaching at the University of Padua when I was assistant in Milan and there were also, in the following years, few opportunities to meet him, mainly because of the commuter habits of Italian academic life, Bagiotti's great amiability allowed me to benefit from his friendship and impressive culture.
This chapter documents an exchange between Leonard Savage, founder of the subjective probability approach to decision-making, and Karl Popper, advocate of the so-called propensity…
Abstract
This chapter documents an exchange between Leonard Savage, founder of the subjective probability approach to decision-making, and Karl Popper, advocate of the so-called propensity approach to probability, of which there is no knowledge in the literature on probability theory. Early in 1958, just after being informally tested by Daniel Ellsberg with a test of consistency in decision-making processes that originated the so-called Ellsberg Paradox, Savage was made aware that a similar argument had been put forward by Popper. Popper found it paradoxical that two apparently similar events should be attributed the same subjective probability even though evidence supporting judgment in one case was different than in the other case. On this ground, Popper rejected the subjective probability approach. Inspection of the Savage Papers archived at Yale University Library makes it possible to document Savage’s reaction to Popper, of which there is no evidence in his published writings. Savage wrote to Popper denying that his criticism had paradoxical content and a brief exchange followed. The chapter shows that while Savage was unconvinced by Popper’s argument he was not hostile to an axiomatically founded generalization of his theory.
Details
Keywords
Presents the first chapter in this work with regard to the search for new ideas and better interpretations in the growth and development of new ideas. Investigates the exchange of…
Abstract
Presents the first chapter in this work with regard to the search for new ideas and better interpretations in the growth and development of new ideas. Investigates the exchange of views between thinkers of different points of view. Invites co‐operation between various factions to investigate unification of all known sciences (natural and economic) and to include the arts. Mentions all the great thinkers in these areas and unreservedly discusses their contribution in the school of thought. Proffers that modern technology cannot and should not be slowed down and that for the social economy of human solidarity should be aimed for, to begin a new era for humanity.