Ignoring ignorance and Agreeing to Disagree *
نویسندگان
چکیده
A model of information structure and common knowledge is presented which does not take states of the world as primitive. Rather, these states are constructed as sets of propositions, including propositions which describe knowledge. In this model information structure and measurability structure are endogenously defined in terms of the relation between the propositions. In particular, when agents are ignorant of their own ignorance, the information structure is not a partition of the state space. We show that Aumann’s (Ann. Statist. 4 (1976), 1236-1239) famous result on the impossibility of agreeing to disagree, which was proved for partitions, can be extended to such information structures. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: 021, 026.
منابع مشابه
Euthanasia: 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 کاملAgreeing to Disagree with Limit Knowledge
The possibility for agents to agree to disagree is considered in an extended epistemic-topological framework. In such an enriched context, Aumann’s impossibility theorem is shown to no longer hold. More precisely, agents with a common prior belief satisfying limit knowledge instead of common knowledge of their posterior beliefs may actually entertain distinct posterior beliefs. Hence, agents ca...
متن کامل“Agreeing to disagree” type results: a decision-theoretic approach
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. Th...
متن کاملDeludedly Agreeing to Agree
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). We show that even when the truth axiom is not assumed it turns out that players will find it impossible to agree to disagree under fairly broad conditions.
متن کاملDELUDEDLY 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 کامل