Graduate studies at Western
Theory and Decision 54 (2):151-162 (2003)
|Abstract||Newcomb's problem supposedly involves your choosing one or else two boxes in circumstances in which a predictor has made a prediction of how many boxes you will choose. We argue that the circumstances which allegedly define Newcomb's problem generate a previously unnoticed regress which shows that Newcomb's problem is insoluble because it is ill-formed. Those who favor, as we do, a ``no-box'' reply to Newcomb's problem typically claim either that the problem's solution is underdetermined or else that it is overdetermined. We are no-boxers of the first kind, but the underdetermination we identify is more radical than any previously identified: it blocks the very set-up of the problem and not just potential solutions to the problem once it has been set up. The defect is subtle, but it cripples every genuine version of the problem, regardless of variations in such things as the predictor's degree of reliability, the basis on which the prediction is made, or the amount of money in each box. The regress shows that, surprisingly enough, no one can understand Newcomb's problem, and so no one can possibly solve it|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jordan Howard Sobel (1991). Some Versions of Newcomb's Problem Are Prisoners' Dilemmas. Synthese 86 (2):197 - 208.
John L. Pollock (2010). A Resource-Bounded Agent Addresses the Newcomb Problem. Synthese 176 (1):57 - 82.
Nick Bostrom (2001). The Meta-Newcomb Problem. Analysis 61 (4):309–310.
A. D. Irvine (1993). How Braess' Paradox Solves Newcomb's Problem. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7 (2):141 – 160.
Louis Marinoff (1996). How Braess' Paradox Solves Newcomb's Problem: Not! International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 10 (3):217 – 237.
Christoph Schmidt-Petri (2005). Newcomb's Problem and Repeated Prisoners' Dilemmas. Philosophy of Science 72 (5):1160-1173.
Peter Slezak (2006). Demons, Deceivers And Liars: Newcomb's Malin Génie. [REVIEW] Theory and Decision 61 (3):277-303.
Leigh B. Kelley (1988). Reflections on Deliberative Coherence. Synthese 76 (1):83 - 121.
Simon Burgess (2012). Newcomb's Problem and its Conditional Evidence: A Common Cause of Confusion. Synthese 184 (3):319-339.
Simon Burgess (2004). The Newcomb Problem: An Unqualified Resolution. Synthese 138 (2):261 - 287.
Jan Hendrik Schmidt (1998). Newcomb's Paradox Realized with Backward Causation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (1):67-87.
W. J. Talbott (1987). Standard and Non-Standard Newcomb Problems. Synthese 70 (3):415 - 458.
Carl G. Wagner (1991). Simpson's Paradox and the Fisher-Newcomb Problem. Grazer Philosophische Studien 40:185-194.
Added to index2010-09-02
Total downloads11 ( #107,776 of 755,778 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,433 of 755,778 )
How can I increase my downloads?