Cookies?
Library Header Image
LSE Research Online LSE Library Services

Does practical deliberation crowd out self-prediction?

Rabinowicz, Wlodek (2002) Does practical deliberation crowd out self-prediction? Erkenntnis, 57 (1). pp. 91-122. ISSN 0165-0106

This is the latest version of this item.

Full text not available from this repository.
Identification Number: 10.1023/A:1020106622032

Abstract

It is a popular view thatpractical deliberation excludes foreknowledge of one's choice. Wolfgang Spohn and Isaac Levi have argued that not even a purely probabilistic self-predictionis available to thedeliberator, if one takes subjective probabilities to be conceptually linked to betting rates. It makes no sense to have a betting rate for an option, for one's willingness to bet on the option depends on the net gain from the bet, in combination with the option's antecedent utility, rather than on the offered odds. And even apart from this consideration, assigning probabilities to the options among which one is choosing is futile since such probabilities could be of no possible use in choice. The paper subjects these arguments to critical examination and suggests that, appearances notwithstanding, practical deliberation need not crowd outself-prediction.

Item Type: Article
Official URL: http://link.springer.com/journal/10670
Additional Information: © 2002 Kluwer Academic Publishers
Divisions: Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method
Subjects: B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > B Philosophy (General)
B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BC Logic
B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BJ Ethics
Sets: Departments > Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method
Date Deposited: 20 Nov 2013 15:16
Last Modified: 20 May 2020 00:55
URI: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/54490

Available Versions of this Item

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item