Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The nonidentity problem and the two envelope problem: When is one act better for a person than another?Melinda A. Roberts - 2009 - In David Wasserman & Melinda Roberts (eds.), Harming Future Persons: Ethics, Genetics and the Nonidentity Problem. Springer. pp. 201--228.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  • The Two-envelope Paradox: Asymmetrical Cases.Chunghyoung Lee - 2013 - Mind 122 (485):1-26.
    In the asymmetrical variant of the two-envelope paradox, the amount in envelope A is determined first, and then the amount in envelope B is determined to be either twice or half the amount in A by flipping a fair coin. Contra the common belief that B is preferable to A in this case, I show that the proposed arguments for this common belief all fail, and argue that B is not preferable to A if the expected values of the amounts (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Harming as causing harm.Elizabeth Harman - 2009 - In David Wasserman & Melinda Roberts (eds.), Harming Future Persons: Ethics, Genetics and the Nonidentity Problem. Springer. pp. 137--154.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   67 citations  
  • Biased information and the exchange paradox.Anubav Vasudevan - 2019 - Synthese 196 (6):2455-2485.
    This paper presents a new solution to the well-known exchange paradox, or what is sometimes referred to as the two-envelope paradox. Many recent commentators have analyzed the paradox in terms of the agent’s biased concern for the contents of his own arbitrarily chosen envelope, claiming that such bias violates the manifest symmetry of the situation. Such analyses, however, fail to make clear exactly how the symmetry of the situation is violated by the agent’s hypothetical conclusion that he ought to switch (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark