6

There are plenty of issues with subjective probability assignments to degrees of belief discussed e.g. in SEP's Subjective Probability Theory. I will only address the one outlined in the OP. For a book length treatment see Fundamental Uncertainty: Rationality and Plausible Reasoning volume edited by Marzetti and Brandolini. The idea of distinguishing ...


3

These interactions can be better modeled with Drama Theory, which covers a set of individuals playing multiple games in a row, with the ability to change their decision making process between game theory games. This better models human interactions. If you have drama theory, you can explore more complicated interactions, such as a subset of drama ...


3

Quantum indeterminacy is inextricable from observation because that which we consider to be "quantum indeterminacy" is related to the interpretations of QM rather than the mathematical model behind QM. (I expect this question to get migrated to Physics.SE, because it is really more of a physics question than a philosophy question. When it gets there, I ...


2

It would never be rational to be irrational. In Rational Actor Theory, a rational actor is goal-oriented, reflective and consistent. If you act irrationally, you will not achieve one of these goals. However, there is nothing which prevents a player from choosing to act in a way that appears irrational because they perceive a long term benefit to others ...


1

What accounts for misinterpretation by Linda? Assume Linda is a small kid, now she may have seen Santa and will testify it but we know it is her dad whom she probably saw. Probably another good example of misinterpretation is psychadelics leading people to believe in a different reality. It is quite difficult in a way that you cannot judge if the person ...


1

Game theory models how people behave in terms of incentives. That's useful in a wide variety of contexts, whether talking about ecological systems, individuals, corporations, or nations. "Game theory" doesn't have any opinion on whether people are trustworthy anymore than it has an opinion on what color cars should be. However, if you use game ...


1

People have incentives to tell the truth, and to lie. Agents within a system will use different strategies, and face different consequences. The whole point of game theory is different Nash equilibria might emerge, depending what strategies predominate. If total trust is assumed, but violation of trust has few consequences, that incentivises lying, and could ...


1

Short Answer I'm familiar with no precising definition for this persuasive, but erroneous line of thinking that could be used in an argument, however, arguably this is either equivocation of 'rare' or a conflation of the permutational and repetitional aspects of 'rare'. Long Answer This seems awfully close to cognitive biases that lead to the gambler's ...


1

Strictly speaking, an error is not necessarily a fallacy, it becomes one only when used to illegitimately support an argument. The observation your person is making isn't a logical fallacy --it isn't even factually wrong. You would have to make it the cornerstone of an argument for it to be a fallacy. What fallacy it would be would depend on how it was used. ...


1

In the prisoner's dilemma, there are two sides: There are the prisoners, which are in a very unfortunate situation, and there is the person who set up the dilemma, who I would assume is a thoroughly nasty character who enjoys the situation. In your case, the individual car sales persons don't actually have a dilemma: It's clearly in every single sales ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible