List Which worlds are possible ? A judgment aggregation problem
نویسنده
چکیده
Suppose the members of a group (e.g., committee, jury, expert panel) each form a judgment on which worlds in a given set are possible, subject to the constraint that at least one world is possible but not all are. The group seeks to aggregate these individual judgments into a collective judgment, subject to the same constraint. I show that no judgment aggregation rule can solve this problem in accordance with three conditions: "unanimity", "independence" and "non-dictatorship". Although the result is a variant of an existing theorem on "group identi cation" (Kasher and Rubinstein 1997), the aggregation of judgments on which worlds are possible (or permissible, desirable, etc.) appears not to have been studied yet. The result challenges us to take a stance on which of its conditions to relax.
منابع مشابه
Which Worlds are Possible? A Judgment Aggregation Problem
Suppose the members of a group (e.g., committee, jury, expert panel) each form a judgment on which worlds in a given set are possible, subject to the constraint that at least one world is possible but not all are. The group seeks to aggregate these individual judgments into a collective judgment, subject to the same constraint. I show that no judgment aggregation rule can solve this problem in ...
متن کاملPropositionwise judgment aggregation: the general case
In the theory of judgment aggregation, it is known for which agendas of propositions it is possible to aggregate individual judgments into collective ones in accordance with the Arrow-inspired requirements of universal domain, collective rationality, unanimity preservation, non-dictatorship and propositionwise independence. But it is only partially known (e.g., only in the monotonic case) for w...
متن کاملA General Approach to Aggregation Problems
There is a new field emerging around issues concerning the aggregation of a collection of individual “judgments” of a group of agents. An individual “judgment” is represented by a set of sentences in some logical language. One looks for a procedure that has as its output a “social” judgment. A key result in this area is List and Pettit’s impossibility result [13]. By generalizing the well-known...
متن کاملINTRODUCTION TO JUDGMENT AGGREGATION BY CHRISTIAN LIST and BEN POLAK COWLES FOUNDATION PAPER NO. 1297 COWLES FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS
This introduces the symposium on judgment aggregation. The theory of judgment aggregation asks how several individuals’ judgments on some logically connected propositions can be aggregated into consistent collective judgments. The aim of this introduction is to show how ideas from the familiar theory of preference aggregation can be extended to this more general case. We first translate a proof...
متن کاملJudgment Aggregation
Judgment aggregation theory generalizes social choice theory by having the aggregation rule bear on judgments of all kinds instead of barely judgments of preference. The paper briefly sums it up, privileging the variant that formalizes judgment by a logical syntax. The theory derives from Kornhauser and Sager’s doctrinal paradox and Pettit’s discursive dilemma, which List and Pettit turned into...
متن کامل