David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 38 (1):120-152 (2007)
Recent work in the Everett interpretation has suggested that the problem of probability can be solved by understanding probability in terms of rationality. However, there are *two* problems relating to probability in Everett --- one practical, the other epistemic --- and the rationality-based program *directly* addresses only the practical problem. One might therefore worry that the problem of probability is only `half solved' by this approach. This paper aims to dispel that worry: a solution to the epistemic problem follows from the rationality-based solution to the practical problem.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Daniel Peterson (2011). Qeauty and the Books: A Response to Lewis's Quantum Sleeping Beauty Problem. Synthese 181 (3):367-374.
Peter J. Lewis (2010). Probability in Everettian Quantum Mechanics. Manuscrito 33:285--306.
Frederick Kroon (1993). Rationality and Epistemic Paradox. Synthese 94 (3):377 - 408.
David Wallace (2006). Epistemology Quantized: Circumstances in Which We Should Come to Believe in the Everett Interpretation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (4):655-689.
Hilary Greaves (2004). Understanding Deutsch's Probability in a Deterministic Universe. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 35 (3):423-456.
T. Britton (2004). The Problem of Verisimilitude and Counting Partially Identical Properties. Synthese 141 (1):77 - 95.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads29 ( #49,819 of 1,013,707 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,884 of 1,013,707 )
How can I increase my downloads?