David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Australasian Journal of Philosophy 62 (4):392 – 403 (1984)
This paper looks at a dispute decision theory about how best to characterize expected utility maximization and express the logic of rational choice. Where A1, … , An are actions open to some particular agent, and S1, … , Sn are mutually exclusive states of the world such that the agent knows at least one of which obtains, does the logic of rational choice require an agent to consider the conditional probability of choice Ai given that some state Si obtains, Prob(Ai/Si). Or, is the logic of choice better represented by considering the probability of the counterfactual if Ai then Si, Prob(Ai ⟥-> Si). Causal decision theory, developed by Allan Gibbard, William Harper, and David Lewis defend the counterfactual analysis; whereas, Richard Jeffrey and others defend the conditional probability analysis, evidential decision theory. I argue that the problems posed by cases of decision instability favor evidential decision theory.
|Keywords||decision theory causal decision theory evidential decision theory rational choice expected utility Newcomb's Paradox decision instability Death in Aleppo|
|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
Frank Arntzenius (2008). No Regrets, Or: Edith Piaf Revamps Decision Theory. [REVIEW] Erkenntnis 68 (2):277-297.
Caspar Hare & Brian Hedden (2015). Self‐Reinforcing and Self‐Frustrating Decisions. Noûs 50 (1):n/a-n/a.
Frederick Kroon (1993). Rationality and Epistemic Paradox. Synthese 94 (3):377 - 408.
Paul Weirich (1985). Decision Instability. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 63 (4):465 – 472.
Frank Arntzenius (2008). No Regrets, Or: Edith Piaf Revamps Decision Theory. Erkenntnis 68 (2):277-297.
Similar books and articles
Andy Egan (2007). Some Counterexamples to Causal Decision Theory. Philosophical Review 116 (1):93-114.
Charles F. Manski (2011). Actualist Rationality. Theory and Decision 71 (2):195-210.
Arif Ahmed (2005). Evidential Decision Theory and Medical Newcomb Problems. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (2):191-198.
Michael Clark & Nicholas Shackel (2006). The Dr. Psycho Paradox and Newcomb's Problem. Erkenntnis 64 (1):85 - 100.
Paul Weirich (1988). Hierarchical Maximization of Two Kinds of Expected Utility. Philosophy of Science 55 (4):560-582.
Darren Bradley (2013). Decision Theory, Philosophical Perspectives. In Hal Pashler (ed.), Encyclopedia of the Mind. Sage
James M. Joyce (2000). Why We Still Need the Logic of Decision. Philosophy of Science 67 (3):13.
Ellery Eells (1984). Causal Decision Theory. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1984:177 - 200.
Reed Richter (1985). Rationality, Group Choice and Expected Utility. Synthese 63 (2):203 - 232.
Daniel Hunter & Reed Richter (1978). Counterfactuals and Newcomb's Paradox. Synthese 39 (2):249 - 261.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads41 ( #88,079 of 1,780,583 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #107,070 of 1,780,583 )
How can I increase my downloads?