Skip to main content

Part of the book series: The New Palgrave ((NPA))

Abstract

1. The concept of preference holds a pivotal position in value theory. It may even be considered a ‘value radical’ or common conceptual root of the three main types of evaluative discourse, namely, aesthetic, economic and moral.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  • Arrow, K.J. 1951. Social Choice and Individual Values. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brogan, A. P. 1919. The fundamental value universal. Journal of Philosophy 6(4), February, 967–1104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chisholm, R.M. 1975. The intrinsic value of disjunctive states of affairs. Nous 9(3), September, 295–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chisholm, R.M. and Sosa, E. 1966. On the logic of ‘intrinsically better’. American Philosophical Quarterly 3(3), July, 244–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danielsson, S. 1968. Preference and Obligation. Uppsala: Scriv Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, D., McKinsey, J.C.C. and Suppes, P. 1955. Outlines of a formal theory of value. Philosophy of Science 22(2), April, 140–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halldén, S. 1957. On the Logic ofBetter”. Lund: Gleerup.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, B. 1968a. Fundamental axioms for preference relations. Synthese 18(4), 423–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, B. 1968b. Choice structures and preference relations. Synthese 18(4), 443–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, B. 1969a. Group preferences. Econometrica 37(1), January, 50–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, B. 1969b. Voting and group decision functions. Synthese 20(4), 526–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, B. 1970. Preference Logic, Philosophical Foundations and Applications in the Philosophy of Science. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houthakker, H.S. 1965. On the logic of preference and choice. In Contributions to Logic and Methodology in Honor of J.M. Bochénski, ed. A.–T. Tymieniecka, Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey, F.P. 1931. Truth and probability. In F.P. Ramsey, Foundations of Mathematics and Other Logical Essays, London: Kegan Paul; New York: Humanities Press, 1950.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rescher, N. 1967. Semantic foundations for the logic of preference. In The Logic of Decision and Action, ed. N. Rescher, Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rescher, N. 1969. Introduction to Value Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savage, L. 1954. The Foundations of Statistics. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, G.H. von. 1962. The epistemology of subjective probability. In Proceedings of the 1960 International Congress: Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, ed. E. Nagel, P. Suppes and A. Tarski, Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, G.H. von. 1963. The Logic of Preference. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, G.H. von. 1972. The logic of preference reconsidered. Theory and Decision 3(2). December, 140–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

John Eatwell Murray Milgate Peter Newman

Copyright information

© 1990 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

von Wright, G.H. (1990). Preferences. In: Eatwell, J., Milgate, M., Newman, P. (eds) Utility and Probability. The New Palgrave. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-20568-4_22

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics