Arntzenius on “Why ain’cha rich?”

Erkenntnis 77 (1):15-30 (2012)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
The best-known argument for Evidential Decision Theory (EDT) is the ‘Why ain’cha rich?’ challenge to rival Causal Decision Theory (CDT). The basis for this challenge is that in Newcomb-like situations, acts that conform to EDT may be known in advance to have the better return than acts that conform to CDT. Frank Arntzenius has recently proposed an ingenious counter argument, based on an example in which, he claims, it is predictable in advance that acts that conform to EDT will do less well than acts that conform to CDT. We raise two objections to Arntzenius’s example. We argue, first, that the example is subtly incoherent, in a way that undermines its effectiveness against EDT; and, second, that the example relies on calculating the average return over an inappropriate population of acts
(categorize this paper)
Reprint years
2011, 2012
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2014-04-24
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Bringing About the Past.Dummett, Michael

View all 9 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
227 ( #11,502 of 37,198 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
15 ( #20,989 of 37,198 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.