It’s not a matter of bias toward certainty; accepting Pascal’s Mugger’s terms can be conclusively demonstrated to be a losing strategy. Remember, the purpose is to win. That would imply that “rationality” that complies with the Mugger is not rational after all, which means rethinking the whole thing.
Having said that, I haven’t been able to formulate a response to Pascal’s Mugging myself, so I might be wrong-
...Except that in the process of writing this right now, I think I might have! I need to think this a little further.
It’s not a matter of bias toward certainty; accepting Pascal’s Mugger’s terms can be conclusively demonstrated to be a losing strategy. Remember, the purpose is to win. That would imply that “rationality” that complies with the Mugger is not rational after all, which means rethinking the whole thing.
Having said that, I haven’t been able to formulate a response to Pascal’s Mugging myself, so I might be wrong-
...Except that in the process of writing this right now, I think I might have! I need to think this a little further.