David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (1):67-87 (1998)
In order to refute the widely held belief that the game known as ‘Newcomb's paradox’ is physically nonsensical and impossible to imagine (e.g. because it involves backward causation), I tell a story in which the game is realized in a classical, deterministic universe in a physically plausible way. The predictor is a collection of beings which are by many orders of magnitude smaller than the player and which can, with their exquisite measurement techniques, observe the particles in the player's body so accurately that they can predict his choice (in much the same way as we can predict the motion of celestial bodies). I argue that the player, by choosing whether to take only one box or both boxes, influences whether or not, in the past, the predictor put a million pounds into the second box. Yet, I establish that no causal paradox can arise in this set-up.
|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 Slezak (2006). Demons, Deceivers And Liars: Newcomb's Malin Génie. [REVIEW] Theory and Decision 61 (3):277-303.
Similar books and articles
Jordan Howard Sobel (1991). Some Versions of Newcomb's Problem Are Prisoners' Dilemmas. Synthese 86 (2):197 - 208.
J. L. Mackie (1977). Newcomb's Paradox and the Direction of Causation. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 7 (2):213 - 225.
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.
Daniel Hunter & Reed Richter (1978). Counterfactuals and Newcomb's Paradox. Synthese 39 (2):249 - 261.
A. D. Irvine (1993). How Braess' Paradox Solves Newcomb's Problem. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7 (2):141 – 160.
Nick Bostrom (2001). The Meta-Newcomb Problem. Analysis 61 (4):309–310.
Stephen Maitzen & Garnett Wilson (2003). Newcomb's Hidden Regress. Theory and Decision 54 (2):151-162.
William Lane Craig (1987). Divine Foreknowledge and Newcomb's Paradox. Philosophia 17 (3):331-350.
Milan Cirkovic & Suzana Cveticanin (2002). Backward Causation, Isolation and the Pursuit of Justice. Epistemologia 25 (1):145-162.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads221 ( #11,346 of 1,792,035 )
Recent downloads (6 months)76 ( #8,879 of 1,792,035 )
How can I increase my downloads?