The Common Prior Assumption in Economic Theory

Economics and Philosophy 11 (2):227 (1995)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Why is common priors are implicit or explicit in the vast majority of the differential information literature in economics and game theory? Why has the economic community been unwilling, in practice, to accept and actually use the idea of truly personal probabilities in much the same way that it did accept the idea of personal utility functions? After all, in, both the utilities and probabilities are derived separately for each decision maker. Why were the utilities accepted as personal, and the probabilities not?

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,322

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Minding the Is-Ought Gap.Campbell Brown - 2014 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 43 (1):53-69.
Presuppositions and common ground.Barbara Abbott - 2008 - Linguistics and Philosophy 31 (5):523-538.
Revisiting universalism.Alison Assiter - 2003 - New York: Palgrave-Macmillan.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-10

Downloads
91 (#183,705)

6 months
21 (#122,177)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

References found in this work

The Foundations of Statistics.Leonard J. Savage - 1954 - Wiley Publications in Statistics.
Logical foundations of probability.Rudolf Carnap - 1950 - Chicago]: Chicago University of Chicago Press.
A treatise on probability.John Maynard Keynes - 1921 - Mineola, N.Y.: Dover Publications.

View all 14 references / Add more references