J. S. Mill's Liberal Principle and Unanimity
نویسنده
چکیده
The broad concept of an individual's welfare is actually a cluster of related speci c concepts that bear a \family resemblance" to one another. One might care about how a policy will a ect people both in terms of their subjective preferences and also in terms of some notion of their objective interests. This paper provides a framework for evaluation of policies in terms of welfare criteria that combine these two considerations. Su cient conditions are provided for such a criterion to imply the same ranking of social states as does Pareto's unanimity criterion. Su ciency is proved via study of a community of agents with interdependent ordinal preferences.
منابع مشابه
A Liberal Impossibility of Abstract Argumentation
In abstract argumentation, where arguments are viewed as abstract entities with a binary defeat relation among them, a set of agents may assign individual members the right to determine the collective defeat relation on some pairs of arguments. I prove that even under a minimal condition of rationality, the assignment of rights to two or more agents is inconsistent with the unanimity principle,...
متن کاملA liberal paradox for judgment aggregation
In the emerging literature on judgment (as opposed to preference) aggregation, expert rights or liberal rights have not been investigated yet. When a group forms collective beliefs, it may assign group members with expert knowledge on certain propositions the right to determine the collective judgment on those propositions; and, when a group forms collective goals or desires, it may assign memb...
متن کاملIn defence of mandatory bicycle helmet legislation: response to Hooper and Spicer.
We invoke a triple rationale to rebut Hooper and Spicer's argument against mandatory helmet laws. First, we use the laws of physics and empirical studies to show how bicycle helmets afford substantial protection to the user. We show that Hooper and Spicer erroneously downplay helmet utility and that, as a result, their attack on the utilitarian argument for mandatory helmet laws is weakened. Ne...
متن کاملCausal attribution and Mill's methods of experimental inquiry: past, present and prospect.
J. S. Mill proposed a set of Methods of Experimental Inquiry that were intended to guide causal inference under every conceivable set of circumstances in which experiments or observations could be carried out. The conceptual and historical relationship between these Methods and modern models of causal attribution is investigated. Mill's work retains contemporary relevance because his insights s...
متن کاملThe Disunity of Unanimity
Unanimity is the optimal voting rule in a world of zero transactions costs, when side payments are impossible. When side payments are available and transactions costs are zero, the voting rule is irrelevant to the ultimate outcome. In the more realistic situation where side payments are allowed but transactions costs are positive, a unanimity voting rule creates situations where the collective ...
متن کامل