Indecision and Buridan’s Principle.

The problem known as Buridan’s Ass says that a hungry donkey equipoised between two identical bales of hay will starve to death. Indecision kills the ass. Some philosophers worry about human analogs. Computer scientists since the 1960s have known about the computer versions of such cases. From what...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Synthese Vol. 200; no. 5; pp. 1 - 28
Autor principal: Coren, Daniel
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Oct2022
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=158684665&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 158684665
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00397857
        4LI
      jtl: Synthese
      issn: 00397857
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Oct2022
      vid: 200
      iid: 5
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        158684665
        10.1007/s11229-022-03843-3
      ppf: 1
      ppct: 27
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 315KB
      tig:
        atl: Indecision and Buridan’s Principle.
      aug:
        au: Coren, Daniel
        affil: Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs, USA
      sug:
      keyword:
        Agency
        Akrasia
        Decision
        Jean Buridan
        Omission
        Responsibility
      ab: The problem known as Buridan’s Ass says that a hungry donkey equipoised between two identical bales of hay will starve to death. Indecision kills the ass. Some philosophers worry about human analogs. Computer scientists since the 1960s have known about the computer versions of such cases. From what Leslie Lamport calls ‘Buridan’s Principle’—a discrete decision based on a continuous range of input-values cannot be made in a bounded time—it follows that the possibilities for human analogs of Buridan’s Ass are far more wide-ranging and securely provable than has been acknowledged in philosophy. We are never necessarily decisive. This is mathematically provable. I explore four consequences: first, increased interest of the literature’s solutions to Buridan’s Ass; second, a new asymmetry between responsibility for omissions and responsibility for actions; third, clarification of the standard account of akrasia; and, fourth, clarification of the role of credences in normative decision-theory.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Synthese is a copyright of Springer, 2022. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Synthese
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2022
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N