Extracting Money from Causal Decision Theorists.

Newcomb's problem has spawned a debate about which variant of expected utility maximisation (if any) should guide rational choice. In this paper, we provide a new argument against what is probably the most popular variant: causal decision theory (CDT). In particular, we provide two scenarios in whic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Philosophical Quarterly Vol. 71; no. 4; pp. 1 - 17
Autores principales: Oesterheld, Caspar, Conitzer, Vincent
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Oxford University Press / USA Oct2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=153655869&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 153655869
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00318094
        PHQ
      jtl: Philosophical Quarterly
      issn: 00318094
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Oct2021
      vid: 71
      iid: 4
      pid: 622
      pub: Oxford University Press / USA
    artinfo:
      ui:
        153655869
        10.1093/pq/pqaa086
      ppf: 1
      ppct: 16
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 199KB
      tig:
        atl: Extracting Money from Causal Decision Theorists.
      aug:
        au:
          Oesterheld, Caspar
          Conitzer, Vincent
        affil: Duke University , NC, USA
      su:
        Causal models
        Decision theory
        Rational choice theory
        Expected utility
        Inconsistency (Logic)
      sug:
        subj:
          Causal models
          Decision theory
          Rational choice theory
          Expected utility
          Inconsistency (Logic)
      keyword:
        causal decision theory
        causality
        Dutch book arguments
        dynamic inconsistency
        evidential decision theory
        expected utility
        Newcomb's problem
        ratificationism
      ab: Newcomb's problem has spawned a debate about which variant of expected utility maximisation (if any) should guide rational choice. In this paper, we provide a new argument against what is probably the most popular variant: causal decision theory (CDT). In particular, we provide two scenarios in which CDT voluntarily loses money. In the first, an agent faces a single choice and following CDT's recommendation yields a loss of money in expectation. The second scenario extends the first to a diachronic Dutch book against CDT.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: © 2019 Scots Philosophical Association and the University of St. Andrews.
      item: Philosophical Quarterly
      holder: Oxford University Press / USA
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2021
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N