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
    In the Death in Damascus scenario, whichever location the... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→In the Death in Damascus case, the threatened man lacks a self-ratifying pure strategy under causal decision theory.

    In the Death in Damascus scenario, whichever location the man chooses, Death will be there, making no pure strategy maximize expected utility given its realization.

    Free Will & ForeknowledgeModality & Possibility
    ?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

    Modality & PossibilityFree Will & Foreknowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Consequentialism1 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Modality & Possibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Causal decision theory uses a specific formula for computing expected utility.In the Death in Damascus case, the threatened man lacks a self-ratifying pure st...

    Similar

    If Death cannot predict the man's choice, the probability distribution...88%When no pure strategy maximizes utility against all opponent strategie...75%If Pascal's decision problem is exactly as Pascal claims, then by the ...74%Ratification is defined in terms of an option's expected utility given...74%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: decision-causal
    View source passageHide passage
    Weirich (1985) and Harper (1986) define ratification in terms of an option’s expected utility given its realization rather than given a decision to realize it. An option is self-ratifying if and only if it maximizes expected utility given its realization. This account of ratification accommodates cases in which an option and a decision to realize it have different expected utilities. Weirich and Harper also assume causal decision theory’s formula for expected utility. In the case of Death in Dam

    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