(Hard ernst) corrigendum Van Brakel, J., philosophy of chemistry (u. klein)

Erkenntnis 57 (1):91-122 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX


It is a popular view thatpractical deliberation excludes foreknowledge of one's choice. Wolfgang Spohn and Isaac Levi have argued that not even a purely probabilistic self-predictionis available to thedeliberator, if one takes subjective probabilities to be conceptually linked to betting rates. It makes no sense to have a betting rate for an option, for one's willingness to bet on the option depends on the net gain from the bet, in combination with the option's antecedent utility, rather than on the offered odds. And even apart from this consideration, assigning probabilities to the options among which one is choosing is futile since such probabilities could be of no possible use in choice. The paper subjects these arguments to critical examination and suggests that, appearances notwithstanding, practical deliberation need not crowd outself-prediction.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 94,439

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library


Added to PP

24 (#658,277)

6 months
16 (#219,535)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Hallvard Lillehammer
Birkbeck College, University Of London
Wlodek Rabinowicz
Lund University
Peter McLaughlin
University of Heidelberg

Citations of this work

Tournament decision theory.Abelard Podgorski - 2020 - Noûs 56 (1):176-203.
Why Take Both Boxes?Jack Spencer & Ian Wells - 2019 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 99 (1):27-48.

View all 15 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references