David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 76 (1):135 - 169 (1988)
The difficulty of defining rational behavior in game situations is that the players'' strategies will depend on their expectations about other players'' strategies. These expectations are beliefs the players come to the game with. Game theorists assume these beliefs to be rational in the very special sense of beingobjectively correct but no explanation is offered of the mechanism generating this property of the belief system. In many interesting cases, however, such a rationality requirement is not enough to guarantee that an equilibrium will be attained. In particular, I analyze the case of multiple equilibria, since in this case there exists a whole set of rational beliefs, so that no player can ever be certain that the others believe he has certain beliefs. In this case it becomes necessary to explicitly model the process of belief formation. This model attributes to the players a theory of counterfactuals which they use in restricting the set of possible equilibria. If it were possible to attribute to the players the same theory of counterfactuals, then the players'' beliefs would eventually converge.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Carlos E. Alchourrón, Peter Gärdenfors & David Makinson (1985). On the Logic of Theory Change: Partial Meet Contraction and Revision Functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic 50 (2):510-530.
Michael Bacharach (1987). A Theory of Rational Decision in Games. Erkenntnis 27 (1):17 - 55.
Ken Binmore (1987). Modeling Rational Players: Part I. Economics and Philosophy 3 (02):179-.
Peter Gärdenfors (1986). Belief Revisions and the Ramsey Test for Conditionals. Philosophical Review 95 (1):81-93.
Peter Gärdenfors (1984). Epistemic Importance and Minimal Changes of Belief. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 62 (2):136 – 157.
Citations of this work BETA
Giacomo Bonanno (1991). The Logic of Rational Play in Games of Perfect Information. Economics and Philosophy 7 (01):37-65.
Similar books and articles
Brian Skyrms, Raffaele Argiento, Robin Pemantle & and Stanislav Volkov, Learning to Signal: Analysis of a Micro-Level Reinforcement Model.
Steven J. Brams & D. Marc Kilgour (1988). National Security Games. Synthese 76 (2):185 - 200.
Martin Dufwenberg & Johan Lindén (1996). Inconsistencies in Extensive Games. Erkenntnis 45 (1):103 - 114.
Cristina Bicchieri & Gian Aldo Antonelli (1995). Game-Theoretic Axioms for Local Rationality and Bounded Knowledge. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 4 (2):145-167.
Andrew M. Colman & Michael Bacharach (1997). Payoff Dominance and the Stackelberg Heuristic. Theory and Decision 43 (1):1-19.
Peter Vanderschraaf & Diana Richards (1997). Joint Beliefs in Conflictual Coordination Games. Theory and Decision 42 (3):287-310.
Linda Mealey (2000). Mating Strategies as Game Theory: Changing Rules? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):613-613.
Cristina Bicchieri (1993). Counterfactuals, Belief Changes, and Equilibrium Refinements. Philosophical Topics 21 (1):21-52.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads23 ( #104,456 of 1,696,167 )
Recent downloads (6 months)15 ( #33,553 of 1,696,167 )
How can I increase my downloads?