JUDGMENT AGGREGATION

Philippe Mongin

Working Papers from HAL

Abstract: Judgment aggregation theory generalizes social choice theory by having the aggregation rule bear on judgments of all kinds instead of barely judgments of preference. The paper briefly sums it up, privileging the variant that formalizes judgment by a logical syntax. The theory derives from Kornhauser and Sager's doctrinal paradox and Pettit's discursive dilemma, which List and Pettit turned into an impossibility theorem - the first of a long list to come. After mentioning this stage, the paper restates three theorems that are representative of the current work, by Nehring and Puppe, Dokow and Holzman, and Dietrich and Mongin, respectively, and it concludes by explaining how Dietrich and List have recovered Arrow's theorem as a particular application of the theory.

Keywords: agrégation des jugements; agrégation logique; paradoxe doctrinal; dilemme discursif; théorie du choix social; Judgment Aggregation; Logical Aggregation; Doctrinal Paradox; Discursive Dilemma; Social Choice Theory (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2011-02
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Published in 2011

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
Working Paper: Judgment aggregation (2011)
Working Paper: Judgment aggregation (2011)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-00625434

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Papers from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().