A case of confusing probability and confirmation Jeanne Peijnenburg

Abstract Tom Stoneham put forward an argument purporting to show that coherentists
are, under certain conditions, committed to the conjunction fallacy. Stoneham
considers this argument a reductio ad absurdum of any coherence theory of justification.
I argue that Stoneham neglects the distinction between degrees of confirmation
and degrees of probability. Once the distinction is in place, it becomes clear that no
conjunction fallacy has been committed.