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
    Savage's work formally completed expected utility theory ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Consequentialism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Savage's work formally completed expected utility theory (EUT)

    ConsequentialismTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Von Neumann-Morgenstern expected utility theory lacked a rigorous treatment of subjective probabilities
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Savage (1954) showed how to incorporate subjective probabilities and their relationships to preferences over risk within the EUT framework
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Savage himself acknowledged his framework applies only to 'small worlds' where all consequences and states are exhaustively enumerable in advance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Real decision environments involve genuine Knightian uncertainty where the state space cannot be fully specified, leaving Savage's axioms without grounding.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A foundational gap in the theory's domain of application constitutes an incompleteness that formal elegance within that domain cannot resolve.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Allais (1953) demonstrated systematic violations of EUT's independence axiom in real human choice, exposing normative incompleteness in Savage's framework.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A theory that generates predictive failures under controlled conditions cannot be considered formally complete in any epistemically robust sense.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    ConsequentialismTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Skepticism1 linked

    Related

    A foundational gap in the theory's domain of application constitutes an incomple...A theory that generates predictive failures under controlled conditions cannot b...Allais (1953) demonstrated systematic violations of EUT's independence axiom in ...Real decision environments involve genuine Knightian uncertainty where the state...
    +3 moreShow less
    Savage (1954) showed how to incorporate subjective probabilities and their relat...Savage himself acknowledged his framework applies only to 'small worlds' where a...Von Neumann-Morgenstern expected utility theory lacked a rigorous treatment of s...

    Similar

    Von Neumann-Morgenstern expected utility theory lacked a rigorous trea...82%The expected-utility principle requires all relevant considerations to...81%The expected-utility principle requires that outcomes include every re...80%Causal decision theory uses a specific formula for computing expected ...79%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: game-theory
    View source passageHide passage
    In all of our examples and workings to this point, we have presupposed that players’ beliefs about probabilities in lotteries match objective probabilities. But in real interactive choice situations, agents must often rely on their subjective estimations or perceptions of probabilities. In one of the greatest contributions to twentieth-century behavioral and social science, Savage (1954) showed how to incorporate subjective probabilities, and their relationships to preferences over risk, withi
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit