Authors
Catrin Campbell-Moore
University of Bristol
Bernhard Salow
Oxford University
Abstract
Philosophers have recently attempted to justify particular belief revision procedures by arguing that they are the optimal means towards the epistemic end of accurate credences. These attempts, however, presuppose that means should be evaluated according to classical expected utility theory; and there is a long tradition maintaining that expected utility theory is too restrictive as a theory of means–end rationality, ruling out too many natural ways of taking risk into account. In this paper, we investigate what belief-revision procedures are supported by accuracy-theoretic considerations once we depart from expected utility theory to allow agents to be risk-sensitive. We argue that if accuracy-theoretic considerations tell risk-sensitive agents anything about belief-revision, they tell them the same thing they tell risk-neutral agents: they should conditionalize.
Keywords Accuracy  Expected Utility Theory  Risk Aversion  Conditionalization
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/bjps/axaa006
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 50,287
External links

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

Epistemic Teleology and the Separateness of Propositions.Selim Berker - 2013 - Philosophical Review 122 (3):337-393.
Epistemic Decision Theory.Hilary Greaves - 2013 - Mind 122 (488):915-952.
Epistemic Utility Theory and the Aim of Belief.Jennifer Rose Carr - 2017 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 95 (3):511-534.

View all 12 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Risk Aversion and the Long Run.Johanna Thoma - 2018 - Ethics 129 (2):230-253.
Measuring Belief and Risk Attitude.Sven Neth - 2019 - Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science 297:252–272.
Risk as a Consequence.Paul Weirich - 2020 - Topoi 39 (2):293-303.
Risk and Tradeoffs.Lara Buchak - 2014 - Erkenntnis 79 (S6):1091-1117.
Revisiting Risk and Rationality: A Reply to Pettigrew and Briggs.Lara Buchak - 2015 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 45 (5):841-862.
Risk, Rationality and Expected Utility Theory.Richard Pettigrew - 2015 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 45 (5-6):798-826.
Gambling with Death.H. Orri Stefánsson - 2020 - Topoi 39 (2):271-281.
Risk and Rationality.Lara Buchak - 2013 - Oxford University Press.
Avoiding Risk and Avoiding Evidence.Catrin Campbell-Moore & Bernhard Salow - forthcoming - Australasian Journal of Philosophy:1-21.
Risk Writ Large.Johanna Thoma & Jonathan Weisberg - 2017 - Philosophical Studies 174 (9):2369-2384.
Risk Sensitive Credit.Maura Priest - 2019 - Erkenntnis 84 (3):703-726.
A Theory of Epistemic Risk.Boris Babic - 2019 - Philosophy of Science 86 (3):522-550.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-01-31

Total views
23 ( #423,182 of 2,325,532 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
23 ( #28,443 of 2,325,532 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes