Consequences of Comparability

, &
Philosophical Perspectives 35 (1):70-98 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

We defend three controversial claims about preference, credence, and choice. First, all agents (not just rational ones) have complete preferences. Second, all agents (again, not just rational ones) have real-valued credences in every proposition in which they are confident to any degree. Third, there is almost always some unique thing we ought to do, want, or believe.

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1111/phpe.12157

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

The Case for Comparability.Cian Dorr, Jacob M. Nebel & Jake Zuehl - 2023 - Noûs 57 (2):414-453.
A preference for selfish preferences: The problem of motivations in rational choice political science.Ignacio Sánchez-Cuenca - 2008 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 38 (3):361-378.
A new axiomatic foundation of partial comparability.Alexis Tsoukiàs & Philippe Vincke - 1995 - Theory and Decision 39 (1):79-114.
Incommensurability, incomparability, and rational world-choice.Myron Arthur Penner - 2014 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 75 (1):13-25.
Why Rational Agents Should Not Be Liberal Maximizers.Isaac Levi - 2008 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 38 (S1):1-17.
Choices, Consequences, And Rationality.Walter Bossert - 2001 - Synthese 129 (3):343-369.
Choices, consequences, and rationality.Walter Bossert - 2001 - Synthese 129 (3):343 - 369.
Causal Comparability, Causal Generalizations, and Epistemic Homogeneity.Rosa W. Runhardt - 2017 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 47 (3):183-208.
Belief, credence, and norms.Lara Buchak - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 169 (2):1-27.
Credal Dilemmas.Sarah Moss - 2014 - Noûs 48 (3):665-683.
Interpersonal Level Comparability Implies Comparability of Utility Differences.Yew-Kwang Ng - 1984 - Theory and Decision 17 (2):141.
Interpersonal Level Comparability does not Imply Comparability of Utility Differences - a Comment on Ng.J. Y. Jaffray - 1985 - Theory and Decision 19 (2):201.
Interpersonal level comparability implies comparability of utility differences: A reply.Yew-Kwang Ng - 1989 - Theory and Decision 26 (1):91-93.
On the significance of choice sets with incompatibilities.Vivian Charles Walsh - 1967 - Philosophy of Science 34 (3):243-250.
Interpersonal level comparability does not imply comparability of utility differences? A comment on Ng.Jean-Yves Jaffray - 1985 - Theory and Decision 19 (2):201-203.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-06-10

Downloads
1,432 (#7,432)

6 months
298 (#6,999)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Cian Dorr
New York University
Jake Nebel
Princeton University
Jake Zuehl
New York University

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

Slaves of the passions.Mark Andrew Schroeder - 2007 - New York: Oxford University Press.
On What Matters: Two-Volume Set.Derek Parfit - 2011 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Vagueness.Timothy Williamson - 1994 - New York: Routledge.
Probabilistic Knowledge.Sarah Moss - 2018 - Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

View all 112 references / Add more references