Have Bayesians Solved the Paradox of the Ravens?

Abstract The standard Bayesian solution to the paradox of the ravens maintains that the degree of confirmation provided by seeing a non-black non-raven is positive but negligible compared to that provided by seeing a black raven. I show that, unless we impose severe and unmotivated restrictions on the subject’s priors, this has the consequence that the cumulative confirmation provided by all the non-black non-ravens the subject expects to see is non-negligible compared to the cumulative confirmation provided by all the black ravens the subject expects to see. If this is so, however, then the paradox retains its full force.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Philosophy of Science
Published
2026-03-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/psa.2026.10207
Primary Topic
Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Have Bayesians Solved the Paradox of the Ravens?

Amit Karmon
Philosophy of Science
Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
article

Have Bayesians Solved the Paradox of the Ravens?

Amit Karmon
article en

Abstract

Abstract The standard Bayesian solution to the paradox of the ravens maintains that the degree of confirmation provided by seeing a non-black non-raven is positive but negligible compared to that provided by seeing a black raven. I show that, unless we impose severe and unmotivated restrictions on the subject’s priors, this has the consequence that the cumulative confirmation provided by all the non-black non-ravens the subject expects to see is non-negligible compared to the cumulative confirmation provided by all the black ravens the subject expects to see. If this is so, however, then the paradox retains its full force.

Philosophy of Science
University of Oxford (GB)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.