Which Worlds are Possible? A Judgment Aggregation Problem
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.
Key wordsjudgment aggregation possible worlds propositions
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Arrow, K.: 1951, Social Choice and Individual Values, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
- Dietrich, F. and List, C.: 2007b, Majority voting generalized: Judgment aggregation by quota rules, Journal of Theoretical Politics 19, in press.Google Scholar
- Dokow, E. and Holzman, R.: 2005, Aggregation of Binary Evaluations, Working paper, Technion Israel Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
- Kasher, A. and Rubinstein, A.: 1997, On the question “Who is a J?”: A social choice approach, Logique et Analyse 160, 385–395.Google Scholar
- List, C. and Pettit, P.: 2002, Aggregating sets of judgments: An impossibility result, Economics and Philosophy 18, 89–110.Google Scholar
- Nehring, K. and Puppe, C.: 2002, Strategy-proof Social Choice on Single-peaked Domains: Possibility, Impossibility and the Space Between, Working paper, University of California at Davis.Google Scholar
- Nehring, K. and Puppe, C.: 2005, Consistent Judgement Aggregation: A Characterization, Working paper, University of Karlsruhe.Google Scholar
- Pauly, M.: 2007, Axiomatizing collective judgment sets in a minimal logical language, Synthese in press.Google Scholar