Newcomb’s Paradox and the Direction of Causation

Canadian Journal of Philosophy 7 (2):213 - 225 (1977)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Newcomb's paradox was first presented by Robert Nozick and has been discussed by a considerable number of writers. You are playing a game with a Being who seems to have extraordinary predictive powers. Before you are two boxes, in one of which you can see $1,000. The other is closed and you cannot see what it contains, but you know that the Being has put a million dollars into it if he has predicted that you will take it only, but nothing if he has predicted that you will take both boxes; you may take either both boxes or the closed one only. The Being has correctly predicted the choices of all who have so far played with him. What should you do?Let us call the Being the seer, and his opponent the player. I should also like to reduce the amount that may, or may not, be in the closed box to $10,000. Nearly everyone could make good use of $1,000 and better use of $10,000 or $11,000, but it is hard to say whether a million dollars would be a blessing or a curse.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Logic and knowledge.John Leslie Mackie - 1985 - New York: Clarendon Press. Edited by Joan Mackie & Penelope Mackie.
How braess' paradox solves newcomb's problem.A. D. Irvine - 1993 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7 (2):141 – 160.
How braess' paradox solves newcomb's problem: Not!Louis Marinoff - 1996 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 10 (3):217 – 237.
Newcomb’s Paradox Realized with Backward Causation.Jan Hendrik Schmidt - 1998 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (1):67-87.
An Epistemic Principle Which Solves Newcomb's Paradox.Keith Lehrer & Vann McGee - 1991 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 40 (1):197-217.
Physics and the direction of causation.D. Dieks - 1986 - Erkenntnis 25 (1):85 - 110.
The direction of causation.John L. Mackie - 1966 - Philosophical Review 75 (4):441-466.
Newcomb's paradox.Maurice W. Sasieni - 1984 - Theory and Decision 16 (3):217-223.
The Direction of Causation and the Direction of Time.David H. Sanford - 1984 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 9 (1):53-75.
Common causes and the direction of causation.Brad Weslake - 2005 - Minds and Machines 16 (3):239-257.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-05-29

Downloads
71 (#226,531)

6 months
6 (#504,917)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Against causal decision theory.Huw Price - 1986 - Synthese 67 (2):195 - 212.
"Click!" Bait for Causalists.Huw Price & Yang Liu - 2018 - In Arif Ahmed (ed.), Newcomb's Problem. Cambridge University Press. pp. 160-179.
Newcomb's Hidden Regress.Stephen Maitzen & Garnett Wilson - 2003 - Theory and Decision 54 (2):151-162.
Newcomb’s Paradox Realized with Backward Causation.Jan Hendrik Schmidt - 1998 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (1):67-87.

View all 12 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Newcomb’s Paradox Revisited.Maya Bar-Hillel & Avishai Margalit - 1972 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 23 (4):295-304.
Newcomb's paradox.James Cargile - 1975 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 26 (3):234-239.

Add more references