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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    If backward induction requires evaluating rationality at ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→It cannot be common knowledge among A and B at state w that both A and B are substantively rational

    If backward induction requires evaluating rationality at unreached nodes, the epistemic conditions for common knowledge collapse because there is no fact of the matter about what a rational agent would do at those nodes.

    ?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.

    Key Terms

    Fact of the matter(whether there is a definitive fact determining correct interpretation)
    An objective truth that exists independently—something that is actually the case, rather than a matter of opinion or interpretation.
    Nodes(in logic and model theory)
    Points or positions in a diagram or model that represent different possible situations or states of the world.
    Unreached nodes(as a technical term in game theory diagrams)
    Points in a game or decision tree that a player never actually arrives at because they made different choices earlier—but you might still need to think about what would happen there.
    backward induction(Game theory solution concept applied to sequential games)
    A method of solving extensive-form games by reasoning from terminal nodes backward to earlier decision nodes, determining optimal play at each node given optimal play at all subsequent nodes

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Explore a random proposition
    Start fresh with something unrelated.
    common knowledge(Condition for the formation of a joint commitment)
    A state in which each party knows the relevant fact, knows that the others know it, and so on — used here as the threshold condition for a joint commitment coming into force.
    epistemic conditions
    Conditions such as space and time, without which we cannot cognize any object
    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.
    rationality(Traditional conception being challenged by epistemic relativists)
    A cognitive virtue and hallmark of the scientific method, intimately tied to requirements of consistency, justification, warrant, and evidence for beliefs.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    It cannot be common knowledge among A and B at state w that both A and B are sub...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    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