Juegos de azaraleatoriedad y razonamiento falaz
ISSN: 0213-7615
Datum der Publikation: 2012
Nummer: 3
Seiten: 269-286
Art: Artikel
Andere Publikationen in: Revista española de drogodependencias
Zusammenfassung
The article consists of four sections. The fi rst is a short historical look to display the close relation between games of chance and mathematics. The second argues that games are chance are �unfair� for the gambler and favourable for the betting fi rm; this is precisely where the profi t margin lies for the fi rm, and why this is a profi table business. It also explains how, by means of a simple calculation, we can fi nd out whether a particular bet or a game, understood as a series of bets, is �fair� or not. It furthermore gives the reasons why gamblers will in the long term end up losing their money when they have to play against an adverse �betting quotient�. If players could realise the inevitability of their ruin in the long term for mathematical reasons, they might stop betting. What often tends to happen is nevertheless quite another matter: the players work out their calculations as to how chance works and their possibilities of controlling this, draw their conclusions as to how the physical device generating the results works and � go on betting. The experimental evidence also indicates that when gamblers and non-gamblers alike reason on probabilities, we are very prone to make mistakes. For this reason the third section puts forward several errors of reasoning � �fallacies�, connected with probability and chance. To end with there is a short section containing the conclusions.
Bibliographische Referenzen
- Bordes, M. (2011). Las trampas de Circe: Falacias lógicas y argumentación informal. Madrid: Cátedra.
- De Mora Charles, M.S. (1989). Los inicios de la teoría de la probabilidad. Siglos XVI y XVII. Leioa [Vizcaya]: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad del País Vasco.
- Epstein, R. A. (1995). The Theory of Gambling and Statistical Logic. New York: Academic Press.
- García-Pelayo, I. y García-Pelayo, G. (2003). La fabulosa historia de los Pelayos. Barcelona: Plaza y Janés.
- Hacking, I. (1984). The Emergence of Probability: A Philosophical Study of Early Ideas About Probability, Induction and Statistical Inference. New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Hacking, I. (1995).El surgimiento de la probabilidad, Barcelona, Gedisa
- Haigh, J. (1999). Taking Chances. Winning with Probability. New Cork: Oxford University Press.
- Haigh, J. (2003). Matemáticas y juegos de azar, Barcelona, Tusquets, 2003.
- Hájek, A. (2012). “Interpretations of Probability”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2012/entries/probability-interpret/
- Kahneman, D.; Slovic, P. y Tversky, A. eds. (1982). Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristicsand Biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Martín-Pliego, F. J. y Ruiz-Maya, L. (2006; 2ª ed.). Fundamentos de probabilidad. Madrid: Paraninfo.
- Rescher, N. (1995). Luck. The Brilliant Randomness of Everyday Life. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
- Rescher, N. (1997). La suerte, Madrid, Andrés Bello
- Thorp, E. O. (1966; ed. revisada). Beat the Dealer. A Winning Strategy for the Game of Twenty- One. New York: Vintage.