It's a long time since I acquired my degree, so I frequently struggle to parse these fascinating pieces. What I try to do is apply more plausible thought experiments, relating to actual life (eg I'm trying to read this in the context of dipping a toe into dating markets).
Maybe I'm just not clever enough, but I'd be really into it if you applied some of these arguments to more relatable scenarios.
Either way, keep up the good work - it's kindled renewed interest in the field over here 💪
The scenarios here are ones in which one prefers A+ to A, but doesn't have a preference between A+ and B or A and B. For example, you might say "I can't decide whether to be a lawyer or a doctor" and "I can't decide whether to be a lawyer or a doctor with an extra dollar." In this case, you'd prefer being a doctor plus getting a free dollar to just ordinarily being a doctor, but nonetheless, the extra dollar is not enough to break the tie between doctors and lawyers.
For the second principle, doesn't it make sense to say that although you are indifferent between (H,Y), and (H, Y+1), you aren't indifferent between ((H,Y), (H, Y+1))? Seems like the principle denies this.
The principle seems somewhat arbitrary, too. If there's two coin tosses, what's the reason to exclude the (Heads, Tails) and (Tails, Heads) outcomes?
It's a long time since I acquired my degree, so I frequently struggle to parse these fascinating pieces. What I try to do is apply more plausible thought experiments, relating to actual life (eg I'm trying to read this in the context of dipping a toe into dating markets).
Maybe I'm just not clever enough, but I'd be really into it if you applied some of these arguments to more relatable scenarios.
Either way, keep up the good work - it's kindled renewed interest in the field over here 💪
The scenarios here are ones in which one prefers A+ to A, but doesn't have a preference between A+ and B or A and B. For example, you might say "I can't decide whether to be a lawyer or a doctor" and "I can't decide whether to be a lawyer or a doctor with an extra dollar." In this case, you'd prefer being a doctor plus getting a free dollar to just ordinarily being a doctor, but nonetheless, the extra dollar is not enough to break the tie between doctors and lawyers.
Haha! I understood that already. Maybe I wasn't very clear. And maybe that doesn't matter, either 😅
Perhaps you've seen my cheeky invitation for you to weigh in on something more relatable on my piece today. If you're interested 😉
For the second principle, doesn't it make sense to say that although you are indifferent between (H,Y), and (H, Y+1), you aren't indifferent between ((H,Y), (H, Y+1))? Seems like the principle denies this.
The principle seems somewhat arbitrary, too. If there's two coin tosses, what's the reason to exclude the (Heads, Tails) and (Tails, Heads) outcomes?