Rationality under uncertainty: classic and current criticisms of the Bayesian viewpoint

Carlo Zappia

The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 2018, vol. 25, issue 6, 1387-1419

Abstract: At least since Leonard Savage’s extension of von Neumann and Morgenstern’s expected utility, rational choice theory has been interpreted as a theory prescribing what individuals should do in any decision context, ranging from certainty to risk and uncertainty. After decades this received view, usually termed Bayesian, has been criticized for its normative content. This paper compares the current critique of the notion of Bayesian rationality, proposed by Itzhak Gilboa, with Daniel Ellsberg’s classic critique of Savage’s understanding of rationality. The paper argues that Ellsberg’s classic analysis of Savage’s theory totally anticipated today’s criticism.

Date: 2018
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09672567.2018.1523210 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:eujhet:v:25:y:2018:i:6:p:1387-1419

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/REJH20

DOI: 10.1080/09672567.2018.1523210

Access Statistics for this article

The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought is currently edited by José Luís Cardoso

More articles in The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().