How Much Rationality Do We Need to Explain Conventions?

Philosophy Compass 9 (1):11-21 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article surveys the main philosophical and formal ideas revolving around language as being conventional from the perspective of game theory. For very basic situations, this leads to a coherent view of conventions that offers interesting insights. Although there exist many open problems, this article will argue by outlining partial solution attempts that there is no principled reason for not applying methods from game theory to them

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,612

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-12

Downloads
52 (#298,282)

6 months
10 (#384,931)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Simon Huttegger
University of California, Irvine

Citations of this work

Convention.Michael Rescorla - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Forgiveness and the Multiple Functions of Anger.Antony G. Aumann & Zac Cogley - 2019 - Journal of Philosophy of Emotion 1 (1):44-71.
Emotions, Reasons, and Norms.Evan Simpson - 2019 - Journal of Philosophy of Emotion 1 (1):72-97.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Convention: A Philosophical Study.David Kellogg Lewis - 1969 - Cambridge, MA, USA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Signals: Evolution, Learning, and Information.Brian Skyrms - 2010 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
The logical syntax of language.Rudolf Carnap - 1937 - London,: K. Paul, Trench, Trubner & co.. Edited by Amethe Smeaton.
Convention: A Philosophical Study.David Lewis - 1969 - Synthese 26 (1):153-157.

View all 25 references / Add more references