A scoring rule and global inaccuracy measure for contingent varying importance

Levinstein recently presented a challenge to accuracy-first epistemology. He claims that there is no strictly proper, truth-directed, additive, and differentiable scoring rule that recognises the contingency of varying importance, i.e., the fact that an agent might value the inaccuracy of her credences differently at different possible worlds. In my response, I will argue that accuracy-first epistemology can capture the contingency of varying importance while maintaining its commitment to additivity, propriety, truth-directedness, and differentiability. I will construct a scoring rule - a weighted scoring rule - and a global inaccuracy measure that has all four required properties and recognises the contingency of varying importance. I will show that Levinstein's and my results coexist without contradicting each other