“Agreeing to disagree” type results: a decision-theoretic approach
نویسندگان
چکیده
This paper explores interactive epistemology within Morris’ [S. Morris, Alternative definitions of knowledge, in: M.O.L. Bacharach, L.-A. Gerard-Varet, P. Mongin, H.S. Shin (Eds.), Epistemic Logic and the Theory of Games and Decisions, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Amsterdam, 1997, pp. 217–233] framework of knowledge. Specifically, this paper proves a generalized “agreeing to disagree” result. The major features of this formalization are: (i) non-expected utility receives a unified treatment; (ii) the information structure is not necessarily partitional; (iii) Aumann’s celebrated result of “agreeing to disagree” and Milgrom and Stokey’s well-known result of “no trade” are derived as special cases. This paper also presents some new extensions of the “no trade theorem”. © 2003 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. JEL classification: C70; D80
منابع مشابه
DELUDEDLY AGREEING TO AGREE By
We study conditions relating to the impossibility of agreeing to disagree in models of interactive KD45 belief (in contrast to models of S5 knowledge, which are used in nearly all the agreements literature). Agreement and disagreement are studied under models of belief in three broad settings: non-probabilistic decision models, probabilistic belief revision of priors, and dynamic communication ...
متن کاملOptimized Pricing Decisions In a Multi-Level Supply Chain With Various Power and Channel Structures: A Game-Theoretic Approach
This article studies the optimization of pricing decisions in a supply chain with different channels under different power structure. Three different channel will be considered here; these include: the decentralized, the semi-integrated, and the integrated channel. There are two types of power balance structures for both the decentralized and the semi-integrated channels. The first type is a le...
متن کاملGame-Theoretic Approach for Pricing Decisions in Dual-Channel Supply Chain
In the current study, a dual-channel supply chain is considered containing one manufacturer and two retailers. It is assumed that the manufacturer and retailers have the same decision powers. A game-theoretic approach is developed to analyze pricing decisions under the centralized and decentralized scenarios. First, the Nash model is established to obtain the equilibrium decisions in the decent...
متن کاملAgreeing on decisions: an analysis with counterfactuals
Moses & Nachum ([7]) identify conceptual flaws in Bacharach’s generalization ([3]) of Aumann’s seminal “agreeing to disagree” result ([1]). Essentially, Bacharach’s framework requires agents’ decision functions to be defined over events that are informationally meaningless for the agents. In this paper, we argue that the analysis of the agreement theorem should be carried out in information str...
متن کاملEuthanasia: agreeing to disagree?
In discussions about the legalisation of active, voluntary euthanasia it is sometimes claimed that what should happen in a liberal society is that the two sides in the debate "agree to disagree". This paper explores what is entailed by agreeing to disagree and shows that this is considerably more complicated than what is usually believed to be the case. Agreeing to disagree is philosophically p...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2003