Skip to main content

Bayesian Decision Theory, Rule Utilitarianism, And Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem

  • Chapter
Game Theory, Social Choice and Ethics

Abstract

The first part of this paper reexamines the logical foundations of Bayesian decision theory and argues that the Bayesian criterion of expected-utility maximization is the only decision criterion consistent with rationality. On the other hand, the Bayesian criterion, together with the Pareto optimality requirement, inescapably entails a utilitarian theory of morality. The next sections discuss the role both of cardinal utility and of cardinal interpersonal comparisons of utility in ethics. It is shown that the utilitarian welfare function satisfies all of Arrow’s social choice postulates - avoiding the celebrated impossibility theorem by making use of information which is unavailable in Arrow’s original framework. Finally, rule utilitarianism is contrasted with act utilitarianism and judged to be preferable for the purposes of ethical theory.

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

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

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

  • Anscombe, F. J. and Aumann, R. J.: 1963, ‘A definition of subjective probability’, Annals of Mathematical Statistics 34, pp. 199–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, Kenneth J.: 1963, Social Choice and Individual Values (Wiley, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, Kenneth J.: 1977, ‘Extended sympathy and the possibility of social choice’, American Economic Review, Papers & Proc. 67, pp. 219–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandt, R. B.: 1959, Ethical Theory (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Debreu, Gerard: 1959, Theory of Value (Wiley, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, Peter: 1967, ‘Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics, and interpersonal comparisons of utility’, Journal of Political Economy 75, pp. 765–766.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrod, Roy F. (now Sir Roy): 1936, ‘Utilitarianism revised’, Mind 45, pp. 137–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi, John C.: 1953, ‘Cardinal utility in welfare economics and in the theory of risk-taking’, Journal of Political Economy 61, pp. 434–435. Reprinted in Harsanyi, 1976, pp. 3–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi, JohnC.: 1955, ‘Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics, and interpersonal comparisons of utility’, Journal of Political Economy 63, pp. 309–321. Reprinted in Harsanyi, 1976, pp. 6–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi, JohnC.: 1975a, ‘Can the maximin principle serve as a basis for morality? A critique of John Rawls’s theory’, American Political Science Review 69, pp. 594 – 606. Reprinted in Harsanyi, 1976, pp. 37–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi, JohnC.: 1975b, ‘Nonlinear social welfare functions: Do welfare economists have a special exemption from Bayesian rationality?’, Theory and Decision 6, pp. 311–332. Reprinted in Harsanyi, 1976, pp. 64–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi, John C.: 1976, Essays on Ethics, Social Behavior, and Scientific Explanation (Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland).

    Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi, John C.: 1977, Rational Behavior and Bargaining Equilibrium in Games and Social Situations (Cambridge University Press, New York).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi, John C.: 1977, ‘Rule utilitarianism and decision theory’, Erkenntnis 11, pp. 25–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi, John C.: 1977c, ‘Morality and the theory of rational behavior’, Social Research 44, pp. 623–656.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harsanyi, John C: 1978, ‘Bayesian decision theory and utilitarian ethics’, American Economic Review, Papers & Proc. 68, pp. 223–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, John R. (now Sir John): 1939, Value and Capital (Clarendon Press, Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalai, Ehud and Schmeidler, David: 1977, ‘Aggregation procedure for cardinal preferences: A formulation and proof of Samuelson’s impossibility conjecture’, Econometrica 46, pp. 1431–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, Paul A.: 1974, ‘Complementarity: An essay on the 40th anniversary of the Hicks-Allen revolution in demand theory’, Journal of Economic Literature 12, pp. 1255–1289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, AmartyaK.: 1970, Collective Choice and Social Welfare (Holden-Day, San Francisco).

    Google Scholar 

  • Theil, Henri: 1964, Optimal Decision Rules for Government and Industry (Rand McNally, Chicago).

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Neumann, John and Morgenstern, Oskar: 1947, Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

H. W. Brock

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1979 D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht, Holland, and Boston, U.S.A.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Harsanyi, J.C. (1979). Bayesian Decision Theory, Rule Utilitarianism, And Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem. In: Brock, H.W. (eds) Game Theory, Social Choice and Ethics. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9532-1_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9532-1_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-009-9534-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-9532-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics