Graduate studies at Western
Philosophical Review 119 (4):411 - 447 (2010)
|Abstract||Currently, the most popular views about how to update de se or self-locating beliefs entail the one-third solution to the Sleeping Beauty problem.2 Another widely held view is that an agent‘s credences should be countably additive.3 In what follows, I will argue that there is a deep tension between these two positions. For the assumptions that underlie the one-third solution to the Sleeping Beauty problem entail a more general principle, which I call the Generalized Thirder Principle, and there are situations in which the latter principle and the principle of Countable Additivity cannot be jointly satisfied. The most plausible response to this tension, I argue, is to accept both of these principles, and to maintain that when an agent cannot satisfy them both, she is faced with a rational dilemma.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Peter J. Lewis (2010). Credence and Self-Location. Synthese 175 (3):369-382.
J. Williamson (1999). Countable Additivity and Subjective Probability. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 50 (3):401-416.
Daniel Peterson (2011). Qeauty and the Books: A Response to Lewis's Quantum Sleeping Beauty Problem. Synthese 181 (3):367-374.
Patrick Hawley (2013). Inertia, Optimism and Beauty. Noûs 47 (1):85-103.
Brian Weatherson (2013). Ross on Sleeping Beauty. Philosophical Studies 163 (2):503-512.
Jacob Ross (2012). All Roads Lead to Violations of Countable Additivity. Philosophical Studies 161 (3):381-390.
Added to index2010-04-08
Total downloads58 ( #20,344 of 739,366 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 739,366 )
How can I increase my downloads?