Croatian Journal of Philosophy 2 (3):353-362 (2002)
The aim of this paper is to diagnose the so-called two envelopes paradox. Many writers have claimed that there is something genuinely paradoxical in the situation with the two envelopes, and some writers are now developing non-standards theories of expected utility. I claim that there is no paradox for expected utility theory as I understand that theory, and that contrary claims are confused. Expected utility theory is completely unaffected by the two-envelope paradox
|Keywords||Analytic Philosophy Contemporary Philosophy|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
The Two Envelope Paradox and Using Variables Within the Expectation Formula.Eric Schwitzgebel & Josh Dever - 2008 - Sorites:135-140.
Clark and Shackel on the Two-Envelope Paradox.Christopher J. G. Meacham & Jonathan Weisberg - 2003 - Mind 112 (448):685-689.
Two Envelope Problems and the Roles of Ignorance.Gary Malinas - 2003 - Acta Analytica 18 (1-2):217-225.
The Two-Envelope Paradox, Nonstandard Expected Utility, and the Intensionality of Probability.Terry Horgan - 2000 - Noûs 34 (4):578–603.
Counterfactuals and Newcomb's Paradox.Daniel Hunter & Reed Richter - 1978 - Synthese 39 (2):249 - 261.
Two Envelope Problems.Gary Malinas - 2006 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 9:153-158.
Conditionals, Probabilities, and Utilities: More on Two Envelopes.B. D. Katz & D. Olin - 2010 - Mind 119 (473):171-183.
Added to index2011-12-01
Total downloads19 ( #257,189 of 2,163,972 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #348,100 of 2,163,972 )
How can I increase my downloads?