David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The combination of individual judgments on logically interconnected propositions into a collective decision on the same propositions is called judgment aggregation. Literature in social choice and political theory has claimed that judgment aggregation raises serious concerns. For example, consider a set of premises and a conclusion in which the latter is logically equivalent to the former. When majority voting is applied to some propositions (the premises) it may give a different outcome than majority voting applied to another set of propositions (the conclusion). This problem is known as the doctrinal paradox. The doctrinal paradox is a serious problem since it is not clear whether a collective outcome exists in these cases, and if it does, what it is like. Moreover, the two suggested escape-routes from the paradox - the so-called premise-based procedure and the conclusion-based procedure - are not, as I will show, satisfactory methods for group decision-making. In this paper I introduce a new aggregation procedure inspired by an operator defined in artificial intelligence in order to merge knowledge bases. The result is that we do not need to worry about paradoxical outcomes, since these arise only when inconsistent collective judgments are not ruled out from the set of possible solutions.
|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
Christian List (2006). The Discursive Dilemma and Public Reason. Ethics 116 (2):362-402.
Similar books and articles
Stephan Hartmann, Gabriella Pigozzi & Jan Sprenger (2010). Reliable Methods of Judgment Aggregation. Journal for Logic and Computation 20:603--617.
Stephan Hartmann & Jan Sprenger (2012). Judgment Aggregation and the Problem of Tracking the Truth. Synthese 187 (1):209-221.
Christian List (2005). Group Knowledge and Group Rationality: A Judgment Aggregation Perspective. Episteme 2 (1):25-38.
Gabriella Pigozzi (2005). Two Aggregation Paradoxes in Social Decision Making: The Ostrogorski Paradox and the Discursive Dilemma. Episteme 2 (2):119-128.
Stephan Hartmann & Gabriella Pigozzi (2006). Merging Judgments and the Problem of Truth-Tracking. In Jerome Lang & Ulle Endriss (eds.), Computational Social Choice 2006. University of Amsterdam
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads45 ( #96,261 of 1,911,771 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #255,606 of 1,911,771 )
How can I increase my downloads?