Higher‐order evidence and losing one's conviction

Abstract

AbstractThere has been considerable puzzlement over how to respond to higher‐order evidence. The existing dilemmas can be defused by adopting a ‘two‐dimensional’ representation of doxastic attitudes which incorporates not only substantive uncertainty about which first‐order state of affairs obtains but also the degree of conviction with which we hold the attitude. This makes it possible that in cases of higher‐order evidence the evidence sometimes impacts primarily on our conviction, rather than our substantive uncertainty. I argue that such a two‐dimensional representation is naturally developed by making use of imprecise probabilities.