Doomsday and objective chance

Abstract

Lewis’s Principal Principle says that one should usually align one’s credences with the known chances. In this paper I develop a version of the Principal Principle that deals well with some exceptional cases related to the distinction between metaphysical and epistemic modal­ity. I explain how this principle gives a unified account of the Sleeping Beauty problem and chance-­based principles of anthropic reasoning. In doing so, I defuse the Doomsday Argument that the end of the world is likely to be nigh. GPI Working Paper No. 8-2021

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

The Role of the Protocol in Anthropic Reasoning.Joseph Y. Halpern - 2015 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 2:195-206.
A note on the doomsday argument.Peter J. Lewis - 2010 - Analysis 70 (1):27-30.
Modal Realism and Anthropic Reasoning.Mario Gomez-Torrente - forthcoming - Australasian Journal of Philosophy.
The Quantum Doomsday Argument.Alastair Wilson - 2017 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 68 (2).
Justifying Lewis’s Kinematics of Chance.Patryk Dziurosz-Serafinowicz - 2021 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 72 (2):439-463.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-10-10

Downloads
147 (#128,468)

6 months
86 (#55,813)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Teruji Thomas
Oxford University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Attitudes de dicto and de se.David Lewis - 1979 - Philosophical Review 88 (4):513-543.
Epistemic Two-Dimensional Semantics.David J. Chalmers - 2004 - Philosophical Studies 118 (1-2):153-226.
The nature of epistemic space.David J. Chalmers - 2011 - In Andy Egan & Brian Weatherson (eds.), Epistemic Modality. Oxford University Press.
What conditional probability could not be.Alan Hájek - 2003 - Synthese 137 (3):273--323.

View all 20 references / Add more references