Newcomb's Paradox Analysis

1454 Words6 Pages
Without a doubt, the legacy of Newcomb’s paradox remains prevalent in the contemporary era. Essentially, the paradox brings to attention a striking conflict between two particular intuitions in regards to decision-making. Furthermore, it points out that what may appear to be the most rational choice could actually bring about a worse outcome than what may appear to be the irrational choice. Most importantly, the paradox incites a sense of ambiguity and raises questions about the degree of free will in the case of decision making. Throughout this essay, I will be detailing the paradox’s various components and analyzing it’s two unique approaches in order to ultimately argue that the choice to one-box yields more reward in the end. Before all…show more content…
Which approach do we take? I would like to start off my solution to this paradox by analyzing what a “paradox” actually is. From what I know, a paradox exists when variable or unsteady premises are supported by seemingly reasonable conclusions. When it comes to Newcomb’s Paradox, however, there are two arguments to analyze. These two approaches argue the opposite and yet, both appear to be equally persuasive. The question, therefore, is whether or not the paradox is truly successful in making these contrasting arguments equally convincing. If the paradox fails to do so, then it is safe to claim that that there is not paradox at all. In my opinion, the two arguments or approaches are not equally convincing. Based on the foundation of Newcomb’s paradox, I have been able to find a plausible explanation for the Predictor’s ability to accurately assume every individual's’ action. Thus, I personally believe that one-boxing would yield better outcomes than two-boxing. Now, it is necessary to mention that one of the main elements of this paradox is this idea of prediction. In my perspective, prediction can be defined in two ways. Firstly, prediction can be directly connected to this idea of sensing the future, or foreknowledge. This idea of prescience is parallel to the idea that one has the capacity to time travel. For example, I know that it will rain tomorrow because I have foreseen the future. On the other hand, when an individual has noticed patterns or analogous conditions over time and predicts an outcome based on these encounters, this is classified as scientific prediction. Scientific prediction additionally rests on this supposition of consistency in nature. Now, this view of prediction differs tremendously from the aforementioned. This definition is essentially how I can predict that if I drop a glass cup, it will shatter. Now that I have presented these two versions of prediction, I
Open Document