Graduate studies at Western
Erkenntnis 28 (1):117 - 133 (1988)
|Abstract||I will characterize the utilitarian and maximin rules of social choice game-theoretically. That is, I will introduce games whose solutions are the utilitarian and maximin distributions respectively. Then I will compare the rules by exploring similarities and differences between these games. This method of comparison has been carried out by others. But I characterize the two rules using games that involve bargaining within power structures. This new characterization better highlights the ethical differences between the rules.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Daniel G. Arce M. (1997). Correlated Strategies as Institutions. Theory and Decision 42 (3):271-285.
Linda Mealey (2000). Mating Strategies as Game Theory: Changing Rules? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):613-613.
Marc Pauly (2005). Changing the Rules of Play. Topoi 24 (2):209-220.
John C. Harsanyi (1977). Rule Utilitarianism and Decision Theory. Erkenntnis 11 (1):25 - 53.
Daniel Eggers (2011). Hobbes and Game Theory Revisited: Zero-Sum Games in the State of Nature. Southern Journal of Philosophy 49 (3):193-226.
Stephan Hartmann, Claus Beisbart & Luc Bovens (2005). A Utilitarian Assessment of Alternative Decision Rules in the Council of Ministers. European Union Politics 6 (4):395-419.
Mohammed Dore (1997). On Playing Fair: Professor Binmore on Game Theory and the Social Contract. Theory and Decision 43 (3):219-239.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads5 ( #170,132 of 738,393 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,269 of 738,393 )
How can I increase my downloads?