Democratic answers to complex questions: an epistemic perspective

Bovens, Luc and Rabinowicz, Wlodek (2006) Democratic answers to complex questions: an epistemic perspective. Synthese, 150 (1). pp. 131-153. ISSN 0039-7857

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

This paper addresses a problem for theories of epistemic democracy. In a decision on a complex issue which can be decomposed into several parts, a collective can use different voting procedures: Either its members vote on each sub-question and the answers that gain majority support are used as premises for the conclusion on the main issue (premise based-procedure, pbp), or the vote is conducted on the main issue itself (conclusion-based procedure, cbp). The two procedures can lead to different results. We investigate which of these procedures is better as a truth-tracker, assuming that there exists a true answer to be reached. On the basis of the Condorcet jury theorem, we show that the pbp is universally superior if the objective is to reach truth for the right reasons. If one instead is after truth for whatever reasons, right or wrong, there will be cases in which the cbp is more reliable, even though, for the most part, the pbp still is to be preferred.

Item Type:	Article
Official URL:	http://link.springer.com/journal/11229
Additional Information:	© 2006 Springer
Divisions:	Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method
Subjects:	B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > B Philosophy (General)
Date Deposited:	12 Sep 2007
Last Modified:	21 Apr 2024 17:09
URI:	http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/2719

Available Versions of this Item

• Democratic answers to complex questions: an epistemic perspective. (deposited 12 Sep 2007) [Currently Displayed]
  • Democratic answers to complex questions: an epistemic perspective. (deposited 22 Nov 2013 09:23)

Actions (login required)

View Item