David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Economics and Philosophy 14 (02):215- (1998)
Hume is rightly credited with giving a brilliant, and perhaps the best, account of justice as convention . Hume's importance as a forerunner of modern economics has also long been recognized. However, most of Hume's readers have not fully appreciated how closely Hume's analysis of convention foreshadows a particular branch of economic theory, namely, game theory . Starting with the work of Barry , Runciman and Sen and Lewis , there has been a flowering of literature on the informal game-theoretic insights to be found in classics of political philosophy such as Hobbes , Locke , Hume and Rousseau . A number of authors in this tradition, including Lewis , Gauthier , Mackie , and Postema , have identified passages in Hume which they interpret as giving informal examples of specific games. Yet, unlike his predecessors, Hobbes and Locke, Hume does much more than present examples which have a game-theoretic structure. In his account of convention, Hume gives general conditions which characterize the resolution of social interaction problems, and in the examples he uses to illustrate this account, Hume outlines several different methods by which agents can arrive at such a resolution. Hume's general account of convention and his explanations of the origins of particular conventions together constitute a theory of strategic interaction, which is precisely what game theory aspires to be
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Peter Vanderschraaf (2010). The Invisible Foole. Philosophical Studies 147 (1):37 - 58.
Simon M. Huttegger (2014). How Much Rationality Do We Need to Explain Conventions? Philosophy Compass 9 (1):11-21.
Similar books and articles
Boudewijn De Bruin (2005). Game Theory in Philosophy. Topoi 24 (2):197-208.
William Kline (2012). Hume's Theory of Business Ethics Revisited. Journal of Business Ethics 105 (2):163-174.
P. Vanderschraaf (1998). Knowledge, Equilibrium and Convention. Erkenntnis 49 (3):337-369.
Robin P. Cubitt & Robert Sugden (2003). Common Knowledge, Salience and Convention: A Reconstruction of David Lewis' Game Theory. Economics and Philosophy 19 (2):175-210.
Margaret Gilbert (1983). Agreements, Conventions, and Language. Synthese 54 (3):375 - 407.
Margaret Gilbert (1981). Game Theory Andconvention. Synthese 46 (1):41 - 93.
Neil Tennant (2001). Game Theory and Conventiont. Nordic Journal of Philosophical Logic 6 (1):3-19.
Margaret P. Gilbert (2008). Social Convention Revisited. Topoi (1-2):5-16.
Peter Vanderschraaf (1995). Convention as Correlated Equilibrium. Erkenntnis 42 (1):65 - 87.
Boudewijn de Bruin (2005). Game Theory in Philosophy. Topoi 24 (2):197-208.
Added to index2010-08-10
Total downloads42 ( #63,850 of 1,700,337 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #206,271 of 1,700,337 )
How can I increase my downloads?