ABSTRACT
A key diff erence between the EU thesis and the REU thesis is that while the former holds that there are only two internal attitudes that are combined in preferences – utilities and credences – the latter holds that there are three: utilities, credences, and risk attitudes. 1 Roughly, utilities measure how much an individual
ABSTRACT I have claimed that risk-weighted expected utility (REU) maximizers are rational, and that their preferences cannot be captured by expected utility (EU) theory. Richard Pettigrew and Rachael Briggs have recently challenged these claims. Both authors argue that only EU-maximizers are rational. In addition, Pettigrew argues that the preferences of REU-maximizers can indeed be captured by EU theory, and Briggs argues that REU-maximizers lose a valuable tool for simplifying their decision problems. I hold that their arguments do not succeed and that my original claims still stand. However, their arguments do highlight some costs of REU theory.
