Mind 112 (448):685-689 (2003)
Clark and Shackel have recently argued that previous attempts to resolve the two-envelope paradox fail, and that we must look to symmetries of the relevant expected-value calculations for a solution. Clark and Shackel also argue for a novel solution to the peeking case, a variant of the two-envelope scenario in which you are allowed to look in your envelope before deciding whether or not to swap. Whatever the merits of these solutions, they go beyond accepted decision theory, even contradicting it in the peeking case. Thus if we are to take their solutions seriously, we must understand Clark and Shackel to be proposing a revision of standard decision theory. Understood as such, we will argue, their proposal is both implausible and unnecessary.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
The Two Envelope Paradox and Using Variables Within the Expectation Formula.Eric Schwitzgebel & Josh Dever - 2008 - Sorites:135-140.
Two Envelope Problems and the Roles of Ignorance.Gary Malinas - 2003 - Acta Analytica 18 (1-2):217-225.
Decision Theory, Symmetry and Causal Structure: Reply to Meacham and Weisberg.Michael Clark & Nicholas Shackel - 2003 - Mind 112 (448):691-701.
Two Envelope Problems.Gary Malinas - 2006 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 9:153-158.
Paradox Lost, but in Which Envelope?Olav Gjelsvik - 2002 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 2 (3):353-362.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads407 ( #5,304 of 2,146,211 )
Recent downloads (6 months)49 ( #4,599 of 2,146,211 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.