Rationality, comparability and maximization

Economics and Philosophy 18 (1):141-156 (2002)
Abstract
James Griffin (1986, 1997, 2000) and Ruth Chang (1997) have argued that alternatives (and values) can be comparable when it is neither true that one is better than the other, nor true that they are exactly equal in value. The relation which holds between them has gone under various names: the alternatives are (Griffin) or (Chang). In this paper, I give a formal analysis of this relation. This analysis allows us to distinguish between two slightly different notions of . It is argued that the distinction between these notions is important for discussions of rationality, as is the distinction between or and incomparability
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 10,612
External links
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
Diego Lanzi (2010). Embedded Choices. Theory and Decision 68 (3):263-280.
Similar books and articles
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

12 ( #126,405 of 1,098,415 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #285,057 of 1,098,415 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.