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
    McClennen's 'resolute choice' framework shows agents can ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Transitivity of preferences is a plausible rationality condition.

    McClennen's 'resolute choice' framework shows agents can be rationally immune to money pumps without requiring transitive preferences.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Resolute choice allows agents to pre-commit to plans that prevent exploitation, even if individual preferences seem intransitive in isolation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Money pump arguments assume myopic choice-by-choice decisions; resolute agents can rationally resist by treating sequences as unified wholes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Transitivity requirements conflate logical consistency with rational agency; agents can be rational via strategic commitment without preference ordering.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If resolute choice prevents money pumps only by ignoring preference revelation, it masks rather than solves the underlying intransitivity problem.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Pre-commitment immunity requires explaining why non-transitive underlying preferences don't generate new exploitable decision points at commitment stage.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Agents who genuinely prefer A to B to C to A face genuine rational conflict; framing it as resolute planning doesn't eliminate the inconsistency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedMoral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    Agents who genuinely prefer A to B to C to A face genuine rational conflict; fra...If resolute choice prevents money pumps only by ignoring preference revelation, ...Money pump arguments assume myopic choice-by-choice decisions; resolute agents c...Pre-commitment immunity requires explaining why non-transitive underlying prefer...
    +3 moreShow less
    Resolute choice allows agents to pre-commit to plans that prevent exploitation, ...Transitivity of preferences is a plausible rationality condition.Transitivity requirements conflate logical consistency with rational agency; age...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit