What did it mean to be reasonable in the Age of Reason? Enlightenment mathematicians such as Blaise Pascal, Jakob Bernoulli, and Pierre Simon Laplace sought to answer this question, laboring over a theory of rational decision, action, and belief under conditions of uncertainty. Lorraine Daston brings to life their debates and philosophical arguments, charting the development and application of probability theory by some of the greatest thinkers of the age. Now with an incisive new preface, Classical Probability in the Enlightenment traces the emergence of new kind of mathematics designed to turn good sense into a reasonable calculus.
Lorraine Daston is director emerita of the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science (MPIWG) in Berlin, visiting professor in the Committee on Social Thought at the University of Chicago, and a permanent fellow at the Berlin Institute for Advanced Study. Her books include Rules: A Short History of What We Live By (Princeton).
“The reader feels like a twentieth-century observer set down to eavesdrop on erudite philosophical arguments on miracles and the problem of induction, and thence to wander through the streets of Europe observing lotteries, peeping inside assurance offices, and finally perhaps to witness a murderer fleeing the scene of his crime. . . . Although the Age of Reason may have turned out to be a disappointment to the probabilists of that age, Daston has provided us with an excellent history of their ideas, one which has the power to delight and enlighten the reader.”—Mary S. Morgan, Times Higher Education
“This book presents a comprehensive, insightful survey of the history of probability, both in terms of its scientific and its social uses. . . . It represents a substantial contribution not only to the history of probability but also to our understanding of the Enlightenment in general.”—Joseph W. Dauben, American Scientist
“Daston’s book is great fun to read because of its variety of well-chosen topics, thoughtfully interpreted and presented in wonderfully rich language. She extends considerably the range of subjects involved in the development of probability theory and so displays an impressive independence from conventional approaches to its history.”—Ivo Schneider, American Historical Review
