Philosophies 2 (2):11 (2017)

Abstract
In An Introduction to Probability Theory and its Applications, W. Feller established a way of ending the St. Petersburg paradox by the introduction of an entrance fee, and provided it for the case in which the game is played with a fair coin. A natural generalization of his method is to establish the entrance fee for the case in which the probability of heads is θ. The deduction of those fees is the main result of Section 2. We then propose a Bayesian approach to the problem. When the probability of heads is θ the expected gain of the St. Petersburg game is finite, therefore there is no paradox. However, if one takes θ as a random variable assuming values in the paradox may hold, which is counter-intuitive. In Section 3 we determine necessary conditions for the absence of paradox in the Bayesian approach and in Section 4 we establish the entrance fee for the case in which θ is uniformly distributed in, for in this case there is a paradox.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.3390/philosophies2020011
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,037
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Dissolving the Star-Tree Paradox.Bengt Autzen - 2016 - Biology and Philosophy 31 (3):409-419.
The St. Petersburg Gamble and Risk.Paul Weirich - 1984 - Theory and Decision 17 (2):193-202.
On the Normative Dimension of St. Petersburg Paradox.David Teira - 2006 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37 (2):210-23.
On the Normative Dimension of the St. Petersburg Paradox.David Teira - 2006 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 37 (2):210-223.
The Enigma Of Probability.Nick Ergodos - 2014 - Journal of Cognition and Neuroethics 2 (1):37-71.
A New Bayesian Solution to the Paradox of the Ravens.Susanna Rinard - 2014 - Philosophy of Science 81 (1):81-100.
“The Ravens Paradox” is a Misnomer.Roger Clarke - 2010 - Synthese 175 (3):427-440.
Vexing Expectations.Harris Nover & Alan Hájek - 2004 - Mind 113 (450):237-249.
Why Bayesians Needn’T Be Afraid of Observing Many Non-Black Non-Ravens.Florian F. Schiller - 2012 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 43 (1):77-88.
Complex Expectations.Alan Hájek & Harris Nover - 2008 - Mind 117 (467):643 - 664.
Evidence.Victor DiFate - 2007 - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-01-17

Total views
5 ( #1,176,936 of 2,454,407 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,346 of 2,454,407 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes