> Which alternative is more probable?
> (1) Linda is a bank teller.
> (2) Linda is a bank teller and is active in the feminist movement.
If Linda is a randomly chosen person, then clearly 1 is more probable.
However, there is another sense in which 2 is more likely to be true. For example, in the radiology department where I work, doctors ordering studies need to enter in a reason for the study. Frequently, they put something generic like "pain" to get the study approved, which may or may not be accurate. On the other hand, if I saw a history that said "1 day history of RLQ pain, nausea, and fever", I would consider that history to be more likely to be true.
So in a narrow probabilistic sense, 1 is true, but when you consider that people sometimes make stuff up or don't have the full story, you might rationally judge a more detailed story to be more believable.
If Linda is a randomly chosen person, then clearly 1 is more probable.
However, there is another sense in which 2 is more likely to be true. For example, in the radiology department where I work, doctors ordering studies need to enter in a reason for the study. Frequently, they put something generic like "pain" to get the study approved, which may or may not be accurate. On the other hand, if I saw a history that said "1 day history of RLQ pain, nausea, and fever", I would consider that history to be more likely to be true.
So in a narrow probabilistic sense, 1 is true, but when you consider that people sometimes make stuff up or don't have the full story, you might rationally judge a more detailed story to be more believable.