Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Common knowledge of rationality in epistemic-probability ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Free Will & Foreknowledge
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The single-state epistemic-probability model assigning profile (u, l) does not satisfy common knowledge of rationality in the relevant sense.

    Common knowledge of rationality in epistemic-probability models requires that players hold cautious beliefs.

    Free Will & ForeknowledgeTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Free Will & ForeknowledgeTruth & Knowledge

    Key Terms

    knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
    Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

    Connections

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Free Will & Foreknowledge
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.

    2 topics

    Skepticism3 linkedMoral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    Cautious beliefs require that a player cannot know which option her opponent wil...In the described game, Bob's beliefs in the single-state model are not cautious.The single-state epistemic-probability model assigning profile (u, l) does not s...Therefore the single-state model fails the caution requirement and does not coun...

    Similar

    Economically rational players in novel game situations will assign pos...82%The common belief assumption is a strong requirement on players in gam...81%Iterated commitment to rationality in deliberation eventually yields c...80%Strategic beliefs concern only what players will do given payoffs and ...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: epistemic-game
    View source passageHide passage
    The extent of this conflict is nicely illustrated in Samuelson (1992). In particular, Samuelson (1992) shows that there is no epistemic-probability model[14] of the above game with a state satisfying common knowledge of rationality (where “rationality” means that players do not choose weakly dominated strategies). Prima facie, this is puzzling: What about the epistemic-probability model consisting of a single state \(w\) assigned the profile \((u, l)\)? Isn’t this a model of the above game whe

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective