# name
The philosopher's paradox: How to make a coherent decision in the Newcomb Problem

# metadata.dc.description.abstract[].value
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.

# metadata.dc.publisher[].value
Universidad del País Vasco / Euskal Herriko Unibersitatea

# metadata.dc.rights[].value
cc-by-nc-nd (c) Hoefer, Carl et al., 2019

# metadata.dc.source[].value
Articles publicats en revistes (Filosofia)

# metadata.dc.title[].value
The philosopher's paradox: How to make a coherent decision in the Newcomb Problem