In ‘The unified theory of risk’ (2024) Jaakko Hirvelä and Niall Paterson consider the recent debate between the probabilistic, modal and normic theories of risk, and propose an intriguing new account – the titular unified theory . In this paper I focus on Hirvelä and Paterson’s criticisms of the normic theory, which are based on what they call the ‘privileged world problem’ and on the idea that risks ‘add up’. I will argue that these criticisms can, to an extent, be avoided by adopting a certain reinterpretation of the normic theory, particularly as it pertains to the notion of maximal risk . I then turn to the unified theory of risk and argue that, on close inspection, the theory is very similar to one of the rival theories that it purports to unify – namely, the probabilistic theory – and may share its shortcomings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Martin Smith (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: