2) because of thesis 1, we have reasons to mistrust our intuitions about rational choice in certain complex Newcomb-like decisions.
3) even though structured deliberation can lead you to dismiss a rational option, it will never lead you to select an irrational option.
Structured deliberation treats a synchronic decision as if it were diachronic.
The paper examines structured deliberation in complex Newcomb-like decisions. It defends 3 theses:
1) if you structure your deliberation, you can dismiss an option, even though it would be a perfectly rational choice...
for instance: divide the menu into the chicken dishes and the steak dishes. First, choose whether to get a chicken dish or a steak dish, and thereafter choose which chicken or steak dish to order.
I call this way of deciding what to do "structuring your deliberation"...
I have a new paper forthcoming at Mind, called "Structured Deliberation".
It's about a certain way of deliberating about a complex decisions: split the large menu of options up into submenus, choose between submenus, and thereafter choose from the selected submenu...
philpapers.org/go.pl?aid=GA...
*Excellent* new paper from @bweatherson.bsky.social on deference. He shows, among other things, that Kevin Dorst's Total Trust principle comes apart from the Value of Information thesis in infinite probability frames.
ojs.victoria.ac.nz/ajl/article/...
I don't see the contradiction between "I don't owe you X" and "if you're not an asshole, I'll give you X".
It's my policy on Halloween candy, for instance. I don't owe it to anyone, but if they're not an asshole, I'll give them some.
Last semester, I taught a graduate seminar on Bayesian epistemology. Here are my lecture notes:
jdmitrigallow.com/teaching/epist25/aitbe.pdf
youtu.be/SC2eSujzrUY?...
youtu.be/RQWpF2Gb-gU?...
Look, I agree with you, but the strategy for persuading OP has to be "ultimately, insincerity isn't a good strategy". She's never gonna go for "I just say what I think".
youtu.be/hFMaT9oRbs4?...
Video of a talk I gave at USC's Information Science Institute. It's meant to give an opinionated overview of the developments in the philosophy of causation over the past 30 years.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rqt...
Next was a thought-provoking talk by @dmitrigallow.bsky.social on recent developments in the philosophy of causation at the USC Information Sciences Institute www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rqt... (3/6)
youtu.be/YdOXS_9_P4U?...
This is my favorite song about my home state of Georgia, but since moving to LA, I can't really enjoy it in the same way.
For every cardinal size, a set of things that size could but does not exist
Way more
You can supervise any number of grad students, but only a certain number of dissertations. You just need to start encouraging your students to coauthor dissertations.
That was my first choice
Yes
I reserve "decision" for the situation you are in when you have to select an option and "choice" for the selection you make. I don't think that distinction is there is ordinary English.
I hope that, in the future, we're more focused on the philosophy than the philosophers.
This paper, offering two game-theoretic arguments against Uniqueness in epistemology, is now forthcoming in Erkenntnis.
#philsky
brian.weatherson.org/quarto/posts...
Jefferson dodges the real question of whether the distance between error and suspension is greater than the distance between suspension and truth
I believe this is just the Borel-Kolmogorov paradox, but Kenny and Snow keep telling me there's more to it that I'm missing
