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
List 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 کاملJudgment Aggregation as Maximization of Epistemic and Social Utility
We restate the problem of judgment aggregation and approach it using the decisiontheoretic framework applied by I. Levi to modeling acts of rational acceptance in science. We propose a method of aggregation built on the concepts of epistemic and social utility of accepting a collective judgment, which accounts for such parameters as the factual truth of the propositions, reliability of agents, ...
متن کاملTruth - tracking judgment aggregation over interconnected issues ∗
This paper analyses the problem of aggregating judgments over multiple interconnected issues. Voters share a common preference for reaching true collective judgments, but hold private information about what the truth might be. Information conflicts may occur both between and within voters. Following Bozbay, Dietrich and Peters (2014), we assume strategic voting in a Bayesian voting game setting...
متن کاملBelief 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 کاملJudgment Aggregation in Dynamic Logic of Propositional Assignments
Judgment Aggregation studies how agents take a collective decision on a certain number of issues based on their individual opinions. In recent years, a line of research in Judgment Aggregation investigates how to model this framework within a logical calculus — usually designed ad hoc for this purpose. By contrast, in this thesis we show how it is possible to translate any aggregation problem f...
متن کاملذخیره 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 ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- J. Philosophical Logic
دوره 37 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2008