Judgment aggregation without full rationality

نویسندگان

  • Franz Dietrich
  • Christian List
چکیده

Several recent results on the aggregation of judgments over logically connected propositions show that, under certain conditions, dictatorships are the only propositionwise aggregation functions generating fully rational (i.e., complete and consistent) collective judgments. A frequently mentioned route to avoid dictatorships is to allow incomplete collective judgments. We show that this route does not lead very far: we obtain oligarchies rather than dictatorships if instead of full rationality we merely require that collective judgments be deductively closed, arguably a minimal condition of rationality, compatible even with empty judgment sets. We derive several characterizations of oligarchies and provide illustrative applications to Arrowian preference aggregation and Kasher and Rubinstein’s group identi…cation problem.

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Judgment aggregation without full rationality: a summary

Several recent results on the aggregation of judgments over logically connected propositions show that, under certain conditions, dictatorships are the only independent (i.e., propositionwise) aggregation rules generating fully rational (i.e., complete and consistent) collective judgments. A frequently mentioned route to avoid dictatorships is to allow incomplete collective judgments. We show t...

متن کامل

Belief Merging versus Judgment Aggregation

The problem of aggregating pieces of propositional information coming from several agents has given rise to an intense research activity. Two distinct theories have emerged. On the one hand, belief merging has been considered in AI as an extension of belief revision. On the other hand, judgment aggregation has been developed in political philosophy and social choice theory. Judgment aggregation...

متن کامل

Logics for Collective Reasoning

In this paper, we discuss the approach based on Social Choice Theory and Judgment Aggregation to the definition of collective reasoning. We shall make explicit the aggregative nature of the notion of collective reasoning that is defined in the Judgment Aggregation account and we shall stress that the notion of logical coherence plays a fundamental role in defining collective attitudes. Unfortun...

متن کامل

Propositional Merging and Judgment Aggregation: Two Compatible Approaches?

There are two theories of aggregation of logical formulae: merging and judgment aggregation. In this work we investigate the relationships between these theories; one of our objectives is to point out some correspondences/discrepancies between the associated rationality properties.

متن کامل

Sequential aggregation judgments: Logical derivation of relevance relation

Following Dietrich (2014) we consider using choice by plurality voting (CPV) as a judgment aggregation correspondence. We notice that a result of Roberts (1991) implies that CPV is axiomatically characterized by anonymity, neutrality, unanimity, and (Young’s) reinforcement. Following List (2004) and Dietrich (2015) we construct a sequential voting procedure of judgement aggregation which satisf...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • Social Choice and Welfare

دوره 31  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2008