• AndreasJ
    8
    Hi,

    Condition: An human called X, in this specific case, according to game theory will win the most money and lose the least if applying a lying strategy about event Y happening. If he tells the truth about event Y not happening he will lose all the money and go to jail.

    If I'm making a decision based on X:s testimony about Y, should I or should I not put P(Lying | Human X gives testimony) to be above or equal to 0,5 and ignore his statement to protect my epistemic vulnerability?

    If I put P<0,5 I'm risking making a bad decision because of gullibility and trusting someone who has incentives to lie?

    What would I be justified in doing according to you?

    Many thanks,
  • Deleted User
    0
    This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.
  • AndreasJ
    8
    Thanks Tim. What I'm aiming for is what probability this would be and if it would be below chance or above chance?
  • Deleted User
    0
    This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    P(X is lying | X gives testimony) = [P(X gives testimony | X is lying)] * P(X is lying)]/P(X gives testimony]

    If X's testimony is guaranteed, P(X gives testimony) = 100% = 1

    P(X is lying | X gives testimony) = [1 * P(X is lying)]/1

    P(X is lying | X gives testimony) = P(X is lying)

    Makes sense because X can't lie until and unless X gives faer testimony.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.

×
We use cookies and similar methods to recognize visitors and remember their preferences.