Ramsey and Joyce on deliberation and prediction

Synthese 197:4365-4386 (2020)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Can an agent deliberating about an action A hold a meaningful credence that she will do A? 'No', say some authors, for 'Deliberation Crowds Out Prediction' (DCOP). Others disagree, but we argue here that such disagreements are often terminological. We explain why DCOP holds in a Ramseyian operationalist model of credence, but show that it is trivial to extend this model so that DCOP fails. We then discuss a model due to Joyce, and show that Joyce's rejection of DCOP rests on terminological choices about terms such as 'intention', 'prediction', and 'belief'. Once these choices are in view, they reveal underlying agreement between Joyce and the DCOP-favouring tradition that descends from Ramsey. Joyce's Evidential Autonomy Thesis (EAT) is effectively DCOP, in different terminological clothing. Both principles rest on the so-called 'transparency' of first-person present-tensed reflection on one's own mental states.
Reprint years
2020
ISBN(s)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
LIURAJ
Upload history
First archival date: 2018-08-24
Latest version: 5 (2019-01-30)
View other versions
Added to PP index
2018-07-18

Total views
129 ( #31,420 of 53,518 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
19 ( #32,033 of 53,518 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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