On page 575, Chalmers says:  "...it follows that any disagreements

in science, between proponents of rival research programs, paradigms or whatever, reflected in the (posterior) beliefs of scientists, must have their source in the prior probabilities held by the scientists..."  A little later, he says, "An extreme, and telling, example is provided by Peter Galison's (1997) account of the nature of the work in current fundamental particle physics..." Explain the two criticisms of Bayesianism that Chalmers is referring to with these two comments. Why do these criticisms of "prior probabilities" make the Bayesian enterprise very troublesome?


This is based on the article "The Bayesian Approach" by Alan Chalmers which is in our textbook Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues (2nd ed) by Curd, Cover & Pincock.