IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ijethy/v6y2010i3p327-339.html

Canonical interpretation of propositions as events

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Zimper

Abstract

This paper establishes conditions under which Savage's (1954) informal interpretation of subjective probabilities as measures of confidence in the truth of propositions can be formally justified. For this purpose we construct, for any given propositional language, a canonical state space such that each proposition a of the language is associated with a unique event A defined on this state space. As our main result we establish a one–one onto correspondence between the canonical state space and the set of all truth conditions for the propositional logic such that proposition a is exactly true at every truth condition that corresponds to some state in A. According to our approach, an agent's degree of confidence in the truth of a proposition can, therefore, be interpreted as his or her subjective probability that some truth condition holds at which the proposition is true. Such an interpretation, however, is only valid for agents with unlimited powers of logical reasoning.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Zimper, 2010. "Canonical interpretation of propositions as events," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 6(3), pages 327-339, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ijethy:v:6:y:2010:i:3:p:327-339
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-7363.2010.00138.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-7363.2010.00138.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1742-7363.2010.00138.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert J. Aumann, 1999. "Interactive epistemology I: Knowledge," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 28(3), pages 263-300.
    2. Samet, Dov, 1990. "Ignoring ignorance and agreeing to disagree," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 190-207, October.
    3. Paolo Ghirardato & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Marciano Siniscalchi, 2003. "A Subjective Spin on Roulette Wheels," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1897-1908, November.
    4. Robert Aumann & Adam Brandenburger, 2014. "Epistemic Conditions for Nash Equilibrium," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Language of Game Theory Putting Epistemics into the Mathematics of Games, chapter 5, pages 113-136, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abigail Devereaux & Roger Koppl, 2024. "The use of knowledge in open-ended systems," Papers 2412.00011, arXiv.org.
    2. Satoshi Fukuda, 2025. "Are the players in an interactive belief model meta-certain of the model itself?," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 80(4), pages 1267-1295, December.
    3. Board, Oliver, 2004. "Dynamic interactive epistemology," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 49-80, October.
    4. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2018. "Bayesian game theorists and non-Bayesian players," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(6), pages 1420-1454, November.
    5. Olivier Gossner & Elias Tsakas, 2012. "Reasoning-based introspection," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(4), pages 513-523, October.
    6. Satoshi Fukuda, 2024. "On the consistency among prior, posteriors, and information sets," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 78(2), pages 521-565, September.
    7. John Geanakoplos, 1993. "Common Knowledge," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1062, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    8. Áron Tóbiás, 2023. "Cognitive limits and preferences for information," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 46(1), pages 221-253, June.
    9. Abigail Devereaux & Roger Koppl & Stuart Kauffman, 2024. "Creative evolution in economics," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 489-514, April.
    10. Bonanno, Giacomo & Nehring, Klaus, 1998. "On the logic and role of Negative Introspection of Common Belief," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 17-36, January.
    11. Holler Manfred J., 2002. "Classical, Modern, and New Game Theory / Klassische, Moderne und Neue Spieltheorie," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 222(5), pages 556-583, October.
    12. Giovanna Devetag & Hykel Hosni & Giacomo Sillari, 2012. "You Better Play 7: Mutual versus Common Knowledge of Advice in a Weak-link Experiment," CEEL Working Papers 1201, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    13. Dekel, Eddie & Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2015. "Epistemic Game Theory," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    14. Gossner, O. & Tsakas, E., 2010. "A reasoning approach to introspection and unawareness," Research Memorandum 006, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    15. Pier Luigi Porta & Gianni Viaggi, 2002. "Employment, Technology and Institutions in the Process of Structural Change. A History of Economic Thought Perspective," Working Papers 51, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Jul 2002.
    16. Gossner, Olivier & Tsakas, Elias, 2007. "Testing Rationality on Primitive Knowledge," Working Papers in Economics 275, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    17. Ramzi Suleiman, 2017. "Economic Harmony: An Epistemic Theory of Economic Interactions," Games, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, January.
    18. Yi-Chun Chen & Xiao Luo & Chen Qu, 2016. "Rationalizability in general situations," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 61(1), pages 147-167, January.
    19. Yannai A. Gonczarowski & Yoram Moses, 2023. "Common Knowledge, Regained," Papers 2311.04374, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
    20. Meier, Martin, 2005. "On the nonexistence of universal information structures," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 132-139, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ijethy:v:6:y:2010:i:3:p:327-339. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1742-7355 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.