Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T01:31:35.425Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rational belief and social interaction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 October 2003

Daniel M. Hausman
Daniel M. Hausman*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Wisconsin-Madison,Madison, WI53706-1474http://philosophy.wisc.edu/hausman
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Game theory poses problems for modeling rational belief, but it does not need a new theory of rationality. Experimental results that suggest otherwise often reveal difficulties in testing game theory, rather than mistakes or paradoxes. Even though the puzzles Colman discusses show no inadequacy in the standard theory of rationality, they show that improved models of belief are needed.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , April 2003 , pp. 163 - 164
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Note

1. I do not, in fact, think that the standard theory of rationality is unproblematic (see e.g., my 1992 book, Chs. 2, 12, 13), but the difficulties I see are independent of those that Colman alleges.