Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||According to Sider’s stage theory a subject about to undergo personal fission should expect to experience each outcome simultaneously as distinct persons. How is the subject to make sense of this ? I argue that their most paradigmatically self-interested future-directed behaviour, betting for personal gain, ought to be exactly the same as in equivalent games of chance where the possible outcomes correspond to the fission output branches. So this novel form of expectancy, albeit strange, can be a reliable guide to action.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Douglas E. Ehring (1999). Fission, Fusion, and the Parfit Revolution. Philosophical Studies 94 (3):329-32.
Paul Tappenden (2008). Saunders and Wallace on Everett and Lewis. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (3):307-314.
Rebecca Roache (2010). Fission, Cohabitation and the Concern for Future Survival. Analysis 70 (2):256-263.
Robert Francescotti (2008). Psychological Continuity, Fission, and the Non-Branching Constraint. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 89 (1):21-31.
Mark Moyer (2008). A Survival Guide to Fission. Philosophical Studies 141 (3):299 - 322.
John Wright (2006). Personal Identity, Fission and Time Travel. Philosophia 34 (2):129-142.
R. Martin (1995). Fission Rejuvenation. Philosophical Studies 80 (1):17-40.
Marc Slors (2004). The Closest Continuer View Revisited. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 4 (3):387-402.
Eugene O. Mills (1993). Dividing Without Reducing: Bodily Fission and Personal Identity. Mind 102 (405):37-51.
Paul Tappenden (2011). Expectancy and Rational Action Prior to Personal Fission. Philosophical Studies 153 (2):299 - 306.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads43 ( #30,853 of 741,277 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,338 of 741,277 )
How can I increase my downloads?