Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Egyptology and fanaticism

Bibliographic Data

ID21370573
AuthorsHeather Wilkinson (0000-0001-8570-3351, University of Oxford, corresponding author)
Year2024
Volume181
Issue8
Pages1903-1923
Publication date2024-08-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePhilosophical Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0031-8116 • E-ISSN: 1573-0883
PublisherSpringer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1007/s11098-024-02180-0
OpenAlexW4399883356
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited16

Various decision theories share a troubling implication. They imply that, for any finite amount of value, it would be better to wager it all for a vanishingly small probability of some greater value. Counterintuitive as it might be, this fanaticism has seemingly compelling independent arguments in its favour. In this paper, I consider perhaps the most prima facie compelling such argument: an Egyptology argument (an analogue of the Egyptology argument from population ethics). I show that, despite recent objections from Russell (Noûs, 2023) and Goodsell (Analysis 81(3):420–426, 2021), the argument’s premises can be justified and defended, and the argument itself remains compelling

Argument (complex analysis) · Counterintuitive · Egyptology · Epistemology · Fanaticism · Metaphysics · Philosophy of mind · Political science · Prima facie · Value (mathematics) · Chemistry · Classics · Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · History · Law · Mathematics · Philosophy · Philosophy and Theoretical Science

  • The Unexpected Value of the Future

    Open Access•Heather Wilkinson•Ergo an Open Access Journal of…•2026

  • In defense of moderation

    Open Access•Jacob Barrett•Philosophical Studies•2026

  • Moral Uncertainty, Pure Justifiers, and Agent-Centred Options

    Open Access•Patrick Kaczmarek, Harry R Lloyd•Australasian Journal of Philosophy•2026

  • Separability and Population Ethics

    Teruji Thomas•Oxford Handbook of Population…•2022

  • Risk and Rationality

    Lara Buchak, Lara Marie Buchak•Risk and rationality•2013

  • Problems of Population Theory Obligations to Future Generations . R. I. Sikora , Brian Barry

    Jefferson McMahan•Ethics•1981

  • Weighing Lives

    John Broome•WEIGHING LIVES.•2004

  • A paradox for tiny probabilities and enormous values

    Open Access•Nick Beckstead, Teruji Thomas•Noûs•2024

  • On two arguments for fanaticism

    Open Access•Jack S Russell•Noûs•2024

  • In Defense of Fanaticism

    Heather Wilkinson•Ethics•2022

  • Population Issues in Social Choice Theory, Welfare Economics, and Ethics

    Open Access•Charles Blackorby, Walter Bossert et al.•POPULATION ISSUES IN SOCIAL…•2005

  • Infinite Prospects

    Open Access•Jack S Russell, Yoaav Isaacs•Philosophy and Phenomenological…•2020

  • Regret Theory

    Graham Loomes, Robert Sugden•The Economic Journal•1982

  • Can Risk Aversion Survive the Long Run

    Open Access•Heather Wilkinson, Hayden Wilkinson•The Philosophical Quarterly•2023

Unique citing works3
Citations per year3
Citation span2026 - 2026 (1)
Citation velocitycurrent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 3

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae