Philosophical Studies

, Volume 138, Issue 2, pp 245–269 | Cite as

Sleeping beauty and the dynamics of de se beliefs

  • Christopher J. G. Meacham


This paper examines three accounts of the sleeping beauty case: an account proposed by Adam Elga, an account proposed by David Lewis, and a third account defended in this paper. It provides two reasons for preferring the third account. First, this account does a good job of capturing the temporal continuity of our beliefs, while the accounts favored by Elga and Lewis do not. Second, Elga’s and Lewis’ treatments of the sleeping beauty case lead to highly counterintuitive consequences. The proposed account also leads to counterintuitive consequences, but they’re not as bad as those of Elga’s account, and no worse than those of Lewis’ account.


De se beliefs Updating rule Belief dynamics Sleeping beauty Elga Lewis 


  1. Arntzenius, F. (2002) Reflections on sleeping beauty. Analysis, 62: 53–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arntzenius, F. (2003). Self-locating beliefs, reflection, conditionalization and Dutch books. Journal of Philosophy, 100: 356–370Google Scholar
  3. Bartha, P., & Hitchcock, C. (1999). No one knows the date or the hour: An unorthodox application of Rev. Bayes’ Theorem. Philosophy of Science (Proceedings), S339–S353Google Scholar
  4. Dorr, C. (2002). Sleeping beauty: In defense of Elga. Analysis, 62: 292–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Earman, J. (1992). Bayes or bust: A critical examination of Bayesian confirmation theory, MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  6. Elga, A. (2000). Self-locating belief and the sleeping beauty problem. Analysis, 60: 143–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Elga, A. (2004). Defeating Dr. Evil with self-locating belief. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 69: 383–396Google Scholar
  8. Hall, N. (1994). Correcting the guide to objective chance. Mind, 103: 505–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hall, N. (2004). Two mistakes about credence and chance. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 82, 93–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Halpern, J. (2004). Sleeping beauty reconsidered: Conditioning and reflection in asynchronous systems. Proceedings of the Twentieth Conference on Uncertainty in AI, 226–234.Google Scholar
  11. Hitchcock, C. (2004). Beauty and the bets. Synthese, 139: 405–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Howson, C., & Urbach, P. (1993). Scientific reasoning: The Bayesian approach, I. 2nd ed., Open Court Publishing Company Google Scholar
  13. Lewis, D. (1979). Attitudes de dicto and de se. The Philosophical Review, 88: 513–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lewis, D. (1980). A subjectivist’s guide to objective chance. Studies in Inductive Logic and Probability, Vol. 2, University of California PressGoogle Scholar
  15. Lewis, D. (2001). Sleeping beauty: Reply to Elga. Analysis, 61: 171–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Maher, P. (2005). The concept of inductive probability. Erkenntnis, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  17. Meacham, C. (2005). Three proposals for a theory of chance. Philosophical Perspectives, 19: 281–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Strevens, M. (2004). Bayesian confirmation theory: Inductive logic, or mere inductive framework? Synthese, 141: 365–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Rutgers UniversityNew BrunswickUnited States

Personalised recommendations