Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T00:56:01.356Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Backward-Induction Arguments: A Paradox Regained

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Jordan Howard Sobel
Jordan Howard Sobel*
Affiliation:
Scarborough Campus, University of Toronto
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

According to a familiar argument, iterated prisoner's dilemmas of known finite lengths resolve for ideally rational and well-informed players: They would defect in the last round, anticipate this in the next to last round and so defect in it, and so on. But would they anticipate defections even if they had been cooperating? Not necessarily, say recent critics. These critics “lose” the backward-induction paradox by imposing indicative interpretations on rationality and information conditions. To regain it I propose subjunctive interpretations. To solve it I stress that implications for ordinary imperfect players are limited.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 60 , Issue 1 , March 1993 , pp. 114 - 133
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1993

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.)

Footnotes

†

I am grateful to Allan Gibbard, Philip Pettit, Wiodek Rabinowicz, Willa Freeman-Sobel, and Robert Sugden for comments, and to an anonymous referee for insightful criticism and suggestions.

‡

Send reprint requests to the author, Scarborough Campus, University of Toronto, 1265 Military Trail, Scarborough, Ontario M1C 1A4, Canada.

References

Bernheim, B. D. (1984), “Rationalizable Strategic Behavior”, Econometrica 52: 1007–1028.10.2307/1911196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bicchieri, C. (1989), “Backward Induction without Common Knowledge”, PSA 1988, vol. 2. East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 329–343.Google Scholar
Bicchieri, C. (1990), “Paradoxes of Rationality”, Midwest Studies in Philosophy. Vol. 15, The Philosophy of the Human Sciences. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, pp. 65–79.Google Scholar
Binmore, K. (1987), “Modeling Rational Players: Part 1”, Economics and Philosophy 3: 179–214.10.1017/S0266267100002893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubin, D. and Ross, G. (1985), “Newcomb's Perfect Predictor”, Noûs 19: 439–446.10.2307/2214952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, F. (1987), Conditionals. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kreps, D. M.; Milgrom, P.; Roberts, J.; and Wilson, R. (1982), “Rational Cooperation in the Finitely Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma”, Journal of Economic Theory 27: 245–252.10.1016/0022-0531(82)90029-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreps, D. M. and Wilson, R. (1982), “Reputation and Imperfect Information”, Journal of Economic Theory 27: 253–279.10.1016/0022-0531(82)90030-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luce, R. D. and Raiffa, H. (1957), Games and Decisions: Introduction and Critical Survey. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Milgrom, P. and Roberts, J. (1982), “Predation, Reputation, and Entry Deterrence”, Journal of Economic Theory 27: 280–312.10.1016/0022-0531(82)90031-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montague, R. and Kaplan, D. (1974), “A Paradox Regained”. In R. H. Thomason (ed.), Formal Philosophy: Selected Papers of Richard Montague. New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 271–285.Google Scholar
Pettit, P. and Sugden, R. (1989), “The Backward Induction Paradox”, The Journal of Philosophy 86: 169–182.10.2307/2026960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reny, P. J. (1989), “Common Knowledge and Games with Perfect Information”, PSA 1988, vol. 2. East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 363–369.Google Scholar
Skyrms, B. (1990), The Dynamics of Rational Deliberation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sobel, J. H. (1970), “Utilitarianism: Simple and General”, Inquiry 13: 394–449.10.1080/00201747008601599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sobel, J. H. (1985), “Utility Maximizers in Iterated Prisoner's Dilemmas”. Reprinted with corrections in R. Campbell and L. Sowden (eds.), Paradoxes of Rationality and Cooperation: Prisoner's Dilemma and Newcomb's Problem. Vancouver: The University of British Columbia Press, pp. 306–319.Google Scholar
Sobel, J. H. (1988), “Infallible Predictors”, Philosophical Review 97: 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sobel, J. H. (1990), “Maximization, Stability of Decision, and Rational Actions”, Philosophy of Science 57: 60–77.10.1086/289531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorensen, R. (1986), “Blindspotting and Choice Variations of the Prediction Paradox”, American Philosophical Quarterly 23: 337–352.Google Scholar