Search

The article explores a game-theoretic analysis of social interactions in which each agent's well-being depends crucially, and exclusively, on the well-being of another agent. Topics discussed include the von Neumann Morgenstern utility theorem; the idea that in some interactions, preferences are not just unknown, but ontologically undetermined, and different types of payoff ungroundedness and altruism.

In this article, the author comments on the reasons and epistemic rationality based on the Reason-Knowledge Principle (RKP) proposition of John Hawthorne and Jason Stanley on the correlation of knowledge and action. The author believes that Hawthorne and Stanley should not raise probability claims as reasons if they still cannot prove such claims. She also argues that if probability judgments are taken to translate personal measures, then the RKP is still insufficient to what people need.