Document type
ArticleVersion
Published versionPublication date
Publication license
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2445/166337
The philosopher's paradox: How to make a coherent decision in the Newcomb Problem
Journal Title
Director/Tutor
Additional contribution
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Abstract
We offer a novel argument for one-boxing in Newcomb's Problem. The intentional states of a rational person are psychologically coherent across time, and rational decisions are made against this backdrop. We compare this coherence constraint with a golf swing, which to be effective must include a follow-through after the ball is in flight. Decisions, like golf swings, are extended processes, and their coherence with other psychological states of a player in the Newcomb scenario links her choice with the way she is predicted in a common cause structure. As a result, the standard argument for two-boxing is mistaken.
Related resource
Subject
Subject (English)
Citation
Collections
Citation
HOEFER, Carl, VIGER, Christopher and VIGER, Daniel. The philosopher's paradox: How to make a coherent decision in the Newcomb Problem. Theoria. 2019. Vol. 34, num. 3, pags. 407-421. ISSN 0495-4548. [consulted: 16 of October of 2026]. Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/2445/166337