Counterfactual Desirability.

Richard Bradley, H Orri Stefánsson
{"title":"Counterfactual Desirability.","authors":"Richard Bradley,&nbsp;H Orri Stefánsson","doi":"10.1093/bjps/axv023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The desirability of what actually occurs is often influenced by what could have been. Preferences based on such value dependencies between actual and counterfactual outcomes generate a class of problems for orthodox decision theory, the best-known perhaps being the so-called Allais paradox. In this article we solve these problems by extending Richard Jeffrey's decision theory to counterfactual prospects, using a multidimensional possible-world semantics for conditionals, and showing that preferences that are sensitive to counterfactual considerations can still be desirability-maximizing. We end the article by investigating the conditions necessary and sufficient for a desirability function to be a standard expected-utility function. It turns out that the additional conditions imply highly implausible epistemic principles. 1Two Paradoxes of Rational Choice2Jeffrey Desirability3Counterfactuals 3.1Probability and desirability of counterfactuals3.2Representations4Counterfactual-Dependent Preferences 4.1Preference actualism and desirability maximization4.2Modelling Allais's and Diamond's preferences5Ethical Actualism and Separability 5.1Independence and additive separability5.2 Ethical actualism5.3Expected utility, separability, and ethical actualism6Concluding Remarks7Appendix.</p>","PeriodicalId":509962,"journal":{"name":"The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science","volume":"68 2","pages":"485-533"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/bjps/axv023","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axv023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/8/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

Abstract

The desirability of what actually occurs is often influenced by what could have been. Preferences based on such value dependencies between actual and counterfactual outcomes generate a class of problems for orthodox decision theory, the best-known perhaps being the so-called Allais paradox. In this article we solve these problems by extending Richard Jeffrey's decision theory to counterfactual prospects, using a multidimensional possible-world semantics for conditionals, and showing that preferences that are sensitive to counterfactual considerations can still be desirability-maximizing. We end the article by investigating the conditions necessary and sufficient for a desirability function to be a standard expected-utility function. It turns out that the additional conditions imply highly implausible epistemic principles. 1Two Paradoxes of Rational Choice2Jeffrey Desirability3Counterfactuals 3.1Probability and desirability of counterfactuals3.2Representations4Counterfactual-Dependent Preferences 4.1Preference actualism and desirability maximization4.2Modelling Allais's and Diamond's preferences5Ethical Actualism and Separability 5.1Independence and additive separability5.2 Ethical actualism5.3Expected utility, separability, and ethical actualism6Concluding Remarks7Appendix.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

反事实的愿望。
对实际发生的事情的渴望往往受到本来可能发生的事情的影响。基于实际结果和反事实结果之间的这种价值依赖关系的偏好,为正统决策理论带来了一系列问题,其中最著名的可能是所谓的阿莱悖论。在本文中,我们通过将Richard Jeffrey的决策理论扩展到反事实前景来解决这些问题,使用条件的多维可能世界语义,并表明对反事实考虑敏感的偏好仍然可以是可取性最大化的。在本文的最后,我们研究了理想函数成为标准期望效用函数的必要和充分条件。事实证明,附加条件暗示了极不可信的认知原则。1 .理性选择的两个悖论2 .杰弗瑞·可取性3.反事实3.1 .反事实的概率和可取性3.2 .表象4.反事实依赖偏好4.1 .偏好现实主义和可取性最大化4.2 .模拟阿莱和戴蒙的偏好5.伦理现实主义和可分离性5.1 .独立性和可加性5.2 .伦理现实主义5.3 .预期效用、可分离性和伦理现实主义6 .结论性评论7 .附录。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信