A role for judgment aggregation in coauthoring scientific papers

Bright, Liam Kofi, Heesen, Remco ORCID: 0000-0003-3823-944X and Dang, Haixin (2018) A role for judgment aggregation in coauthoring scientific papers. Erkenntnis, 83 (2). pp. 231-252. ISSN 0165-0106

Preview

Text - Published Version Download (438kB) | Preview

Abstract

This paper addresses the problem of judgment aggregation in science. How should scientists decide which propositions to assert in a collaborative document? We distinguish the question of what to write in a collaborative document from the question of collective belief. We argue that recent objections to the application of the formal literature on judgment aggregation to the problem of judgment aggregation in science apply to the latter, not the former question. The formal literature has introduced various desiderata for an aggregation procedure. Proposition-wise majority voting emerges as a procedure that satisfies all desiderata which represent norms of science. An interesting consequence is that not all collaborating scientists need to endorse every proposition asserted in a collaborative document.

Item Type:	Article
Official URL:	https://link.springer.com/journal/10670
Additional Information:	© 2017 The Author(s)
Divisions:	Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method
Subjects:	B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > B Philosophy (General) Q Science > Q Science (General)
Date Deposited:	16 Apr 2018 11:55
Last Modified:	26 Oct 2024 20:18
URI:	http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/87480

Actions (login required)

View Item