Nonrational Belief Paradoxes as Byzantine Failures(pages 343-358)

Ryan MILLER

ABSTRACT: David Christensen and others argue that Dutch Strategies are more like peer disagreements than Dutch Books, and should not count against agents’ conformity to ideal rationality. I review these arguments, then show that Dutch Books, Dutch Strategies, and peer disagreements are only possible in the case of what computer scientists call Byzantine Failures—uncorrected Byzantine Faults which update arbitrary values. Yet such Byzantine Failures make agents equally vulnerable to all three kinds of epistemic inconsistencies, so there is no principled basis for claiming that only avoidance of true Dutch Books characterizes ideally rational agents. Agents without Byzantine Failures can be ideally rational in a very strong sense, but are not normative for humans.

application-pdf Download PDF

Check Also

IMPROVING CONCEPTUAL ENGINEERING BY DIFFERENTIATING THE FUNCTIONS OF CONCEPTS(pages 359-379)

Rogelio MIRANDA VILCHIS ABSTRACT: The leading assumption of this paper is that we can improve …