Graduate studies at Western
Theory and Decision 46 (1):101-103 (1999)
|Abstract||We tell a story where an agent who chooses in such a way as to make the greatest possible profit on each of an infinite series of transactions ends up worse off than an agent who chooses in such a way as to make the least possible profit on each transaction. That is, contrary to what one might suppose, it is not necessarily rational always to choose the option that yields the greatest possible profit on each transaction|
|Keywords||Decision theory Dutch book Puzzles|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Yaroslav D. Sergeyev (2008). A New Applied Approach for Executing Computations with Infinite and Infinitesimal Quantities. Informatica 19 (4):567-596.
William Lane Craig (2010). Taking Tense Seriously in Differentiating Past and Future. Faith and Philosophy 27 (4):451-456.
Chase Wrenn (2010). A Puzzle About Desire. Erkenntnis 73 (2):185-209.
By Roy Sorensen (2006). Originless Sin: Rational Dilemmas for Satisficers. Philosophical Quarterly 56 (223):213–223.
Roy Sorenson (2006). Originless Sin: Rational Dilemmas for Satisficers. Philosophical Quarterly 56 (223):213 - 223.
Frank Arntzenius, Adam Elga & and John Hawthorne (2004). Bayesianism, Infinite Decisions, and Binding. Mind 113 (450):251-283.
Mark J. Machina (2000). Barrett and Arntzenius's Infinite Decision Puzzle. Theory and Decision 49 (3):291-295.
Myron L. Pulier (2000). A Flawed Infinite Decision Puzzle. Theory and Decision 49 (3):289-290.
Jeffrey A. Barrett & Frank Arntzenius (2002). Why the Infinite Decision Puzzle is Puzzling. Theory and Decision 52 (2):139-147.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads7 ( #142,372 of 739,319 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,243 of 739,319 )
How can I increase my downloads?