Determinism, Counterfactuals, and Decision

Australasian Journal of Philosophy 99 (2):286-302 (2021)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Rational agents face choices, even when taking seriously the possibility of determinism. Rational agents also follow the advice of Causal Decision Theory (CDT). Although many take these claims to be well-motivated, there is growing pressure to reject one of them, as CDT seems to go badly wrong in some deterministic cases. We argue that deterministic cases do not undermine a counterfactual model of rational deliberation, which is characteristic of CDT. Rather, they force us to distinguish between counterfactuals that are relevant and ones that are irrelevant for the purposes of deliberation. We incorporate this distinction into decision theory to develop ‘Selective Causal Decision Theory’, which delivers the correct recommendations in deterministic cases while respecting the key motivations behind CDT.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2020-06-25
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
287 ( #22,453 of 2,448,868 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
88 ( #6,538 of 2,448,868 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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