PhilSci Archive

Arntzenius on “Why ain’cha rich?”

Ahmed, Arif and Price, Huw (2010) Arntzenius on “Why ain’cha rich?”. [Preprint]

WarningThere is a more recent version of this item available.
Download (218Kb) | Preview


    The best-known argument for Evidential Decision Theory (EDT) is the “Why ain'cha rich?” challenge to rival Causal Decision Theory (CDT). The basis for this challenge is that in Newcomb-like situations, acts that conform to EDT may be known in advance to have the better return than acts that conform to CDT. Frank Arntzenius has recently proposed an ingenious counter argument, based on an example in which, he claims, it is predictable in advance that acts that conform to EDT will do less well than acts that conform to CDT. We raise two objections to Arntzenius's example. We argue, first, that the example is subtly incoherent, in a way that undermines its effectiveness against EDT (here we rely on the lessons of Dummett's famous discussion of the conditions for the coherence of a belief in retrocausality); and, second, that the example relies on calculating the average return over an inappropriate population of acts.

    Export/Citation:EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL
    Social Networking:

    Item Type: Preprint
    Keywords: Decision theory, Newcomb's problem
    Subjects: General Issues > Decision Theory
    Depositing User: Prof Huw Price
    Date Deposited: 04 May 2010
    Last Modified: 03 Jul 2011 01:01
    Item ID: 5331

    Available Versions of this Item

    Actions (login required)

    View Item

    Document Downloads