David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Philosophical Logic 35 (1):41 - 63 (2006)
The logic of dominance arguments is analyzed using two different kinds of conditionals: indicative (epistemic) and subjunctive (counter-factual). It is shown that on the indicative interpretation an assumption of independence is needed for a dominance argument to go through. It is also shown that on the subjunctive interpretation no assumption of independence is needed once the standard premises of the dominance argument are true, but that independence plays an important role in arguing for the truth of the premises of the dominance argument. A key feature of the analysis is the interpretation of the doubly conditional comparative "I will get a better outcome if A than if B" which is taken to have the structure "(the outcome if A) is better than (the outcome if B)"
|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
David K. Lewis (1973). Counterfactuals. Blackwell Publishers.
Jonathan Bennett (2003). A Philosophical Guide to Conditionals. Oxford University Press.
Richard Jeffrey (1983). The Logic of Decision. University of Chicago Press.
Leonard J. Savage (1954). The Foundations of Statistics. Wiley Publications in Statistics.
James Joyce (1999). The Foundations of Causal Decision Theory. Cambridge University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Douglas Allchin (2005). The Dilemma of Dominance. Biology and Philosophy 20 (2-3):427-451.
Denise Dellarosa Cummins (1996). Dominance Hierarchies and the Evolution of Human Reasoning. Minds and Machines 6 (4):463-480.
Barbara Applebaum (2001). Raising Awareness of Dominance: Does Recognising Dominance Mean One has to Dismiss the Values of the Dominant Group? Journal of Moral Education 30 (1):55-70.
John N. Constantino (1998). Dominance and Aggression Over the Life Course: Timing and Direction of Causal Influences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (3):369-369.
Mark Colyvan (2006). No Expectations. Mind 115 (459):695-702.
Rui F. Oliveira (1998). Of Fish and Men: A Comparative Approach to Androgens and Social Dominance. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (3):383-384.
Alan Booth & Allan Mazur (1998). Old Issues and New Perspectives on Testosterone Research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (3):386-390.
John Archer (1998). Problems with the Concept of Dominance and Lack of Empirical Support for a Testosterone–Dominance Link. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (3):363-363.
Valerie J. Grant (1998). Dominance Runs Deep. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (3):376-377.
James M. Dabbs (1998). Testosterone and the Concept of Dominance. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (3):370-371.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads26 ( #117,489 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)13 ( #53,688 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?