Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T08:02:43.194Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

MUST GROUP AGENTS BE RATIONAL? LIST AND PETTIT'S THEORY OF JUDGEMENT AGGREGATION AND GROUP AGENCY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 August 2012

Robert Sugden
Robert Sugden*
Affiliation:
University of East Anglia, UKr.sugden@uea.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As a writing partnership, Christian List and Philip Pettit are probably best known for a paper in Economics and Philosophy that describes and generalizes the ‘discursive dilemma’ (List and Pettit 2002). That paper is one of the main points of reference for what is now a large literature on the aggregation of judgements – a literature to which List and Pettit have continued to contribute, individually and jointly. Their new book Group Agency reviews and synthesizes that body of work, and proposes an analysis of group agency in which the aggregation of judgements plays a central role.

Type
Critical notice
Information
Economics & Philosophy , Volume 28 , Issue 2: Formal Ethics , July 2012 , pp. 265 - 273
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, E. 2001. Unstrapping the straitjacket of ‘preference’: a comment on Amartya Sen's contributions to philosophy and economics. Economics and Philosophy 17: 21–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austen-Smith, D. and Banks, J. 1996. Information aggregation, rationality, and the Condorcet jury theorem. American Political Science Review 90: 34–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kornhauser, L.A. and Sager, L.G. 1986. Unpacking the court. Yale Law Journal 96: 82–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
List, C. and Pettit, P. 2002. Aggregating sets of judgments: an impossibility result. Economics and Philosophy 18: 89–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugden, R. 1993. Thinking as a team: towards an explanation of non-selfish behaviour. Social Philosophy and Policy 10: 69–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugden, R. 2006. Hume's non-instrumental and non-propositional decision theory. Economics and Philosophy 22: 365–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar