David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 115 (3):355-373 (1998)
This paper proposes a game-theoretic solution of the surprise examination problem. It is argued that the game of “matching pennies” provides a useful model for the interaction of a teacher who wants her exam to be surprising and students who want to avoid being surprised. A distinction is drawn between prudential and evidential versions of the problem. In both, the teacher should not assign a probability of zero to giving the exam on the last day. This representation of the problem provides a diagnosis of where the backwards induction argument, which “proves” that no surprise exam is possible, is mistaken.
|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
J. Gerbrandy (2007). The Surprise Examination in Dynamic Epistemic Logic. Synthese 155 (1):21 - 33.
Boudewijn De Bruin (2005). Game Theory in Philosophy. Topoi 24 (2):197-208.
Similar books and articles
Kenneth G. Ferguson (1991). Equivocation in the Surprise Exam Paradox. Southern Journal of Philosophy 29 (3):291-302.
John N. Williams (2007). The Surprise Exam Paradox. Journal of Philosophical Research 32:67-94.
John Williams (manuscript). The Surprise Exam Paradox: Disentangling Two Reductios. Philosophical Explorations:67-94.
Richard L. Kirkham (1991). On Paradoxes and a Surprise Exam. Philosophia 21 (1-2):31-51.
Ned Hall (1999). How to Set a Surprise Exam. Mind 108 (432):647-703.
Luc Bovens (1997). The Backward Induction Argument for the Finite Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma and the Surprise Exam Paradox. Analysis 57 (3):179–186.
Earl W. Spurgin (2004). The Goals and Merits of a Business Ethics Competency Exam. Journal of Business Ethics 50 (3):279-288.
J. A. Wright (1967). The Surprise Exam: Prediction on Last Day Uncertain. Mind 76 (301):115-117.
Graham Priest (2000). The Logic of Backwards Inductions. Economics and Philosophy 16 (2):267-285.
Ken Levy (2009). The Solution to the Surprise Exam Paradox. Southern Journal of Philosophy 47 (2):131-158.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads31 ( #61,645 of 1,140,061 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #157,514 of 1,140,061 )
How can I increase my downloads?