List, Christian ORCID: 0000-0003-1627-800X
(2008)
Which worlds are possible?: a judgment aggregation problem.
Journal of Philosophical Logic, 37 (1).
pp. 57-65.
ISSN 0022-3611
|
PDF
Download (183kB) | Preview |
Abstract
Suppose the members of a group (e.g., committee, jury, expert panel) each form a judgment on which worlds in a given set are possible, subject to the constraint that at least one world is possible but not all are. The group seeks to aggregate these individual judgments into a collective judgment, subject to the same constraint. I show that no judgment aggregation rule can solve this problem in accordance with three conditions: “unanimity,” “independence” and “non-dictatorship,” Although the result is a variant of an existing theorem on “group identification” (Kasher and Rubinstein, Logique et Analyse 160:385–395, 1997), the aggregation of judgments on which worlds are possible (or permissible, desirable, etc.) appears not to have been studied yet. The result challenges us to take a stance on which of its conditions to relax.
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Official URL: | http://www.springerlink.com/content/100295/ |
Additional Information: | © 2008 Springer |
Divisions: | Government Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method CPNSS |
Subjects: | H Social Sciences > H Social Sciences (General) |
Date Deposited: | 20 Jun 2008 11:50 |
Last Modified: | 06 Aug 2024 05:45 |
URI: | http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/5807 |
Actions (login required)
![]() |
View Item |