Repository | Journal | Volume | Articles
(2010) Synthese 174 (3).
The application of probabilistic arguments to rational decisions in a single case is a contentious philosophical issue which arises in various contexts. Some authors (e.g. Horgan, Philos Pap 24:209–222, 1995; Levy, Synthese 158:139–151, 2007) affirm the normative force of probabilistic arguments in single cases while others (Baumann, Am Philos Q 42:71–79, 2005; Synthese 162:265–273, 2008) deny it. I demonstrate that both sides do not give convincing arguments for their case and propose a new account of the relationship between probabilistic reasoning and rational decisions. In particular, I elaborate a flaw in Baumann’s reductio of rational single-case decisions in a modified Monty Hall Problem.
Publication details
DOI: 10.1007/s11229-008-9455-y
Full citation:
Sprenger, J. (2010). Probability, rational single-case decisions and the monty hall problem. Synthese 174 (3), pp. 331-340.
This document is unfortunately not available for download at the moment.