David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In Philip Catton & Graham Macdonald (eds.), Karl Popper: Critical Appraisals. Routledge (2004)
1 August 2003 Karl Popper noted that, when social scientists are members of the society they study, they may affect that society. If the individuals to whom a theory initially applies come to understand that theory, then this understanding may affect their behaviour in such a way that the theory ceases to be applicable. This may be called the problem of reflexivity. In this paper, we identify such a problem in an apparently unlikely area: in the area of Condorcet’s famous jury theorem. Suppose that each individual member of some decisionmaking body has a greater than 0.5 chance of making a correct judgment, and suppose further that all individuals’ judgments are independent from each other. Then the jury theorem states that the majority will make a correct judgment with a probability approaching 1 as the number of individuals increases. We argue that, if the individuals come to understand the jury theorem, then they may cease to make independent judgments, thereby undermining one of the conditions for the application of the theorem. Specifically, we suggest that the individuals may be faced with a temptation to free-ride on the epistemic efforts of others. We first develop the problem in some detail and then ask whether there are any escape routes that can protect the jury theorem against the effect of reflexivity.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Franz Dietrich (2008). The Premises of Condorcet's Jury Theorem Are Not Simultaneously Justified. Episteme 5 (1):56-73.
Christian List (2001). Some Remarks on the Probability of Cycles - Appendix 3 to 'Epistemic Democracy: Generalizing the Condorcet Jury Theorem'. Journal of Political Philosophy 9 (3).
Thierry Sebagh & Laurence Lepoder, Searching for Compatibility Between the Jury Theorem and Condorcet's Paradox.
Robert E. Goodin & David Estlund (2004). The Persuasiveness of Democratic Majorities. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 3 (2):131-142.
Christian List & Philip Pettit (2004). An Epistemic Free-Riding Problem? In Philip Catton & Graham Macdonald (eds.), Karl Popper: Critical Appraisals. Routledge
Jan-Willem Romeijn & David Atkinson (2011). Learning Juror Competence: A Generalized Condorcet Jury Theorem. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 10 (3):237-262.
Brett Calcott (2008). The Other Cooperation Problem: Generating Benefit. Biology and Philosophy 23 (2):179-203.
Christian List (2008). Which Worlds Are Possible? A Judgment Aggregation Problem. Journal of Philosophical Logic 37 (1):57 - 65.
Christian List (2005). The Probability of Inconsistencies in Complex Collective Decisions. Social Choice and Welfare 24 (1):3-32.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #172,982 of 1,779,268 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #167,974 of 1,779,268 )
How can I increase my downloads?