A decision-maker faces indeterminacy whenever she has multiple options available to her and no reasons adequate for distinguishing between them. In effect, there is “tie.” Because she has no reasons for selecting one option over others, there is a sense in which she cannot go wrong in making her decision. But this does not mean that she may break any tie any way she wishes. This is because there are different types of indeterminacy. For some types, it does not matter how the indeterminacy gets resolved; for others, the tiebreaking method makes a difference. Many cases of indeterminacy, for example, require resort to a lottery in order to be resolved properly. Others can be satisfactorily resolved via the brute act of “picking.” Therefore, an agent concerned with reasoned decision-making must remember that her work is not necessarily done when the reasons for decision-making have run out. There is still a choice to be made regarding methods of indeterminacy resolution.
|Keywords:||Indeterminacy, Lotteries, Tiebreaking, Rationality, Justice|
Faculty Fellow, Center for Ethics and Public Affairs, Trinity College, New Orleans, Ireland
There are currently no reviews of this product.Write a Review