Decision theory for agents with incomplete preferences

Australasian Journal of Philosophy 92 (3):453-70 (2014)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Orthodox decision theory gives no advice to agents who hold two goods to be incommensurate in value because such agents will have incomplete preferences. According to standard treatments, rationality requires complete preferences, so such agents are irrational. Experience shows, however, that incomplete preferences are ubiquitous in ordinary life. In this paper, we aim to do two things: (1) show that there is a good case for revising decision theory so as to allow it to apply non-vacuously to agents with incomplete preferences, and (2) to identify one substantive criterion that any such non-standard decision theory must obey. Our criterion, Competitiveness, is a weaker version of a dominance principle. Despite its modesty, Competitiveness is incompatible with prospectism, a recently developed decision theory for agents with incomplete preferences. We spend the final part of the paper showing why Competitiveness should be retained, and prospectism rejected.
Reprint years
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2013-09-09
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart.Gigerenzer, Gerd; M. Todd, Peter & Research Group, A. B. C.

View all 22 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Objective Value Is Always Newcombizable.Ahmed, Arif & Spencer, Jack
Expecting the Unexpected.Dougherty, Tom; Horowitz, Sophie & Sliwa, Paulina

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
587 ( #5,728 of 46,343 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
54 ( #15,078 of 46,343 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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