|
|
|
|
|
|
Surprise, self-knowledge, and
commonality
|
|
|
|
Frederic Schick
|
|
|
|
[Back to paper
list] [Start
page] [Alphabetical
index]
|
|
|
|
Keywords: Surprise examination,
Incredibility, Prediction of choices, Skepticism, Prisoner's
dilemma, Common belief, Mutual belief, Categorical
imperative.
|
|
|
|
Abstract: I begin with an analysis of the surprise
examination paradox (enlarging on Quine's treatment). The
student should conclude, not that there won't be a surprise
examination, but that he cannot properly believe that there
will be one. I extend the logic of this analysis to a number
of other issues, to the predictability of one's own future
choices, to certain arguments about prisoners' dilemmas and
about common-belief assumptions in game theory. The logic of
incredibility (of what can't be logically believed by you,
even though other people can believe it) has an analogue
regarding desires: you cannot logically want certain
propositions to be true of yourself. This leads to some
reflections on Kant's Categorical Imperative.
|
|
|

|
|
|
Click here
to obtain the paper in PDF format.
|
|
|
|
Frederic Schick
URutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spinning Ideas, Electronic Essays
Dedicated to Peter Gärdenfors on His Fiftieth
Birthday
|