Abstract
A decade ago, Harris Nover and I introduced the Pasadena game, which we argued gives rise to a new paradox in decision theory even more troubling than the St Petersburg paradox. Gwiazda's and Smith's articles in this volume both offer revisionist solutions. I critically engage with both articles. They invite reflections on a number of deep issues in the foundations of decision theory, which I hope to bring out. These issues include: some ways in which orthodox decision theory might be supplemented; the role of simulations of such infinite games; the role of small probabilities, and of idealization, in decision theory; tolerance about practical norms; and alternative ways of understanding decision theory 's job description.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 533-567 |
Number of pages | 35 |
Journal | Mind |
Volume | 123 |
Issue number | 490 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Apr 2014 |