Abstract
Abstract The aim of this paper is to investigate a very general problem of (radical) interpretation in terms of a simple coordination game: the conformity game. We show how, within our mathematical framework, the solution concept for the conformity game does indeed provide an algorithmic procedure facilitating triangulation, in the sense of Davidson.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Camerer, C. (2003). Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments on Strategic Interaction. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Davidson, D. (2001). Subjective, Intersubjective, Objective. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Feldman, R. (1998). Principle of charity. In Craig, E., editor, Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Routledge, London.
Glock, H. (2003). Quine and Davidson on Language, Thought and Reality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Harsanyi, J. and Selten, R. (1988). A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games. MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Hosni, H. (2005). Rationality as Conformity. Doctoral thesis, School of Mathematics, The University of Manchester, Manchester.
Hosni, H. and Paris, J. (2005). Rationality as conformity. Knowledge Rationality and Action (Synthese), 144(2): 249–285.
Janssen, M. (1998). Focal points. In New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics and the Law. MacMillan, London.
Kraus, S., Rosenschein, J. S., and Fenster, M. (2000). Exploiting focal points among alternative solutions: Two approaches. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 28(1–4):187– 258.
Lewis, D. (1969). Convention: A Philosophical Study. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
McGinn, C. (1977). Charity, interpretation, belief. The Journal of Philosophy, 74(9):521–535.
Mehta, J., Strarmer, C., and Sugden, R. (1994). The nature of salience: An experimental investigation of pure coordination. The Americal Economic Review, 84(3):658–673.
Nozick, R. (1993). The Nature of Rationality. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Osborne, M. J. (2004). An Introduction to Game Theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Parikh, P. (2000). Communication, meaning and interpretation. Linguistic and Philosophy, 23: 185–212.
Paris, J. B. (1994). The Uncertain Reasoner's Companion: A Mathematical Perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Paris, J. B. and Vencovská, A. (1990). A note on the inevitability of maximum entropy. International Journal of Approximated Reasoning, 4:183–224.
Paris, J. B. and Vencovská, A. (2001). Common sense and stochastic independence. In Corfield, D. and Williamson, J., editors, Foundations of Bayesianism, pages 203–240. Kluwer, Dordrecht.
Quine, W. V. (1960). Word and Object. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Schelling, T. (1960). The Strategy of Conflict. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Sugden, R. (1995). A theory of focal points. The Economic Journal, 105(430):533–550.
van Rooy, R. (2004). Evolution of conventional meaning and conversational principles. Syn-these, 139(2):331–366.
Wachbroit, R. (1987). Theories of rationality and principles of charity. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 38:35–47.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science + Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hosni, H. (2009). Interpretation, Coordination and Conformity. In: Majer, O., Pietarinen, AV., Tulenheimo, T. (eds) Games: Unifying Logic, Language, and Philosophy. Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science, vol 15. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9374-6_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9374-6_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-9373-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-9374-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)