English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

I apply some of the lessons from quantum theory, in particular from Bell'stheorem, to a debate on the foundations of decision theory and causation. Bytracing a formal analogy between the basic assumptions of Causal DecisionTheory (CDT)--which was developed partly in response to Newcomb's problem-- andthose of a Local Hidden Variable (LHV) theory in the context of quantummechanics, I show that an agent who acts according to CDT and gives any nonzerocredence to some possible causal interpretations underlying quantum phenomenashould bet against quantum mechanics in some feasible game scenarios involvingentangled systems, no matter what evidence they acquire. As a consequence,either the most accepted version of decision theory is wrong, or it provides apractical distinction, in terms of the prescribed behaviour of rational agents,between some metaphysical hypotheses regarding the causal structure underlyingquantum mechanics.

Causation, decision theory, and Bell's theorem: a quantum analogue of the Newcomb problem