Skip to main content
The insufficiency of the Dutch Book argument
Studia Logica
  • Darrell Patrick ROWBOTTOM, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, and University of Bristol, United Kingdom
Document Type
Journal article
Publication Date
  • Dutch Book,
  • degree of belief,
  • coherence,
  • probabolistic theories of rationality,
  • subjective interpretation of probability

It is a common view that the axioms of probability can be derived from the following assumptions: (a) probabilities reflect (rational) degrees of belief, (b) degrees of belief can be measured as betting quotients; and (c) a rational agent must select betting quotients that are coherent. In this paper, I argue that a consideration of reasonable betting behaviour, with respect to the alleged derivation of the first axiom of probability, suggests that (b) and (c) are incorrect. In particular, I show how a rational agent might assign a ‘probability’ of zero to an event which she is sure will occur.

Publisher Statement

Copyright © Springer 2007

Access to external full text or publisher's version may require subscription.

Additional Information
The same paper is presented at the 2006 Joint Session of the Aristotelian Society and the Mind Association, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom, July 2006.
Full-text Version
Publisher’s Version
Citation Information
Rowbottom, D. P. (2007). The insufficiency of the Dutch Book argument. Studia Logica, 87(1), 65-71. doi: 10.1007/s11225-007-9077-2