Decision theory, intelligent planning and counterfactuals

Minds and Machines 19 (1):61-92 (2008)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
The ontology of decision theory has been subject to considerable debate in the past, and discussion of just how we ought to view decision problems has revealed more than one interesting problem, as well as suggested some novel modifications of classical decision theory. In this paper it will be argued that Bayesian, or evidential, decision-theoretic characterizations of decision situations fail to adequately account for knowledge concerning the causal connections between acts, states, and outcomes in decision situations, and so they are incomplete. Second, it will be argues that when we attempt to incorporate the knowledge of such causal connections into Bayesian decision theory, a substantial technical problem arises for which there is no currently available solution that does not suffer from some damning objection or other. From a broader perspective, this then throws into question the use of decision theory as a model of human or machine planning.
Reprint years
2009
ISBN(s)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
SHADTI
Revision history
Archival date: 2018-07-17
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Counterfactuals.Lewis, David K.
Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart.Gigerenzer, Gerd; M. Todd, Peter & Research Group, A. B. C.

View all 93 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
171 ( #22,748 of 47,276 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
14 ( #40,110 of 47,276 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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