Epistemic decision theory
<p>I explore the prospects for modelling epistemic rationality (in the probabilist setting) via an epistemic decision theory, in a consequentialist spirit. Previous work has focused on cases in which the truth-values of the propositions in which the agent is selecting credences do not depend,...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Oxford University Press
2013
|
| Subjects: |
| _version_ | 1826302254644199424 |
|---|---|
| author | Greaves, H |
| author_facet | Greaves, H |
| author_sort | Greaves, H |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | <p>I explore the prospects for modelling epistemic rationality (in the probabilist setting) via an epistemic decision theory, in a consequentialist spirit. Previous work has focused on cases in which the truth-values of the propositions in which the agent is selecting credences do not depend, either causally or merely evidentially, on the agent's choice of credences. Relaxing that restriction leads to a proliferation of puzzle cases and theories to deal with them, including epistemic analogues of evidential and causal decision theory, and of the Newcomb problem and `Psychopath Button' problem. A variant of causal epistemic decision theory deals well with most cases. However, there is a recalcitrant class of problem cases for which no epistemic decision theory seems able to match our intuitive judgements of epistemic rationality. This lends both precision and credence to the view that there is a fundamental mismatch between epistemic consequentialism and the intuitive notion of epistemic rationality; the implications for understanding the latter are briefly discussed.</p> |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T05:44:47Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:e6dac21e-a64d-43e8-b55e-e7642080878a |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T05:44:47Z |
| publishDate | 2013 |
| publisher | Oxford University Press |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:e6dac21e-a64d-43e8-b55e-e7642080878a2022-03-27T10:33:56ZEpistemic decision theoryJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:e6dac21e-a64d-43e8-b55e-e7642080878aPhilosophyEnglishFaculty of PhilosophyOxford University Press2013Greaves, H<p>I explore the prospects for modelling epistemic rationality (in the probabilist setting) via an epistemic decision theory, in a consequentialist spirit. Previous work has focused on cases in which the truth-values of the propositions in which the agent is selecting credences do not depend, either causally or merely evidentially, on the agent's choice of credences. Relaxing that restriction leads to a proliferation of puzzle cases and theories to deal with them, including epistemic analogues of evidential and causal decision theory, and of the Newcomb problem and `Psychopath Button' problem. A variant of causal epistemic decision theory deals well with most cases. However, there is a recalcitrant class of problem cases for which no epistemic decision theory seems able to match our intuitive judgements of epistemic rationality. This lends both precision and credence to the view that there is a fundamental mismatch between epistemic consequentialism and the intuitive notion of epistemic rationality; the implications for understanding the latter are briefly discussed.</p> |
| spellingShingle | Philosophy Greaves, H Epistemic decision theory |
| title | Epistemic decision theory |
| title_full | Epistemic decision theory |
| title_fullStr | Epistemic decision theory |
| title_full_unstemmed | Epistemic decision theory |
| title_short | Epistemic decision theory |
| title_sort | epistemic decision theory |
| topic | Philosophy |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT greavesh epistemicdecisiontheory |