Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 5
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Zabell, Sandy 2016. Johannes von Kries’s Principien: A Brief Guide for the Perplexed. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, Vol. 47, Issue. 1, p. 131.

    Feduzi, Alberto 2010. On Keynes's conception of the weight of evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Vol. 76, Issue. 2, p. 338.

    Hovanov, Nikolai Yudaeva, Maria and Hovanov, Kirill 2009. Multicriteria estimation of probabilities on basis of expert non-numeric, non-exact and non-complete knowledge. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 195, Issue. 3, p. 857.

    Feduzi, Alberto 2007. On the relationship between Keynes’s conception of evidential weight and the Ellsberg paradox. Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 28, Issue. 5, p. 545.

    Fioretti, Guido 2005. Multidisciplinary Approaches to Theory in Medicine.


Von Kries and the other ‘German logicians’: non-numerical probabilities before Keynes

  • Guido Fioretti (a1)
  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 October 2001

Keynes's A Treatise on Probability (Keynes, 1921) contains some quite unusual concepts, such as non-numerical probabilities and the ‘weights of the arguments’ that support probability judgements. Their controversial interpretation gave rise to a huge literature about ‘what Keynes really did mean’, also because Keynes's later views in macroeconomics ultimately rest on his ideas on uncertainty and expectations formation.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Economics & Philosophy
  • ISSN: 0266-2671
  • EISSN: 1474-0028
  • URL: /core/journals/economics-and-philosophy
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *