Ad
related to: paradoxes in decision making theory in political science quizlet
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In social choice theory, Condorcet's voting paradox is a fundamental discovery by the Marquis de Condorcet that majority rule is inherently self-contradictory.The result implies that it is logically impossible for any voting system to guarantee that a winner will have support from a majority of voters: for example there can be rock-paper-scissors scenario where a majority of voters will prefer ...
The paradox of voting, also called Downs' paradox, is that for a rational and egoistic voter (Homo economicus), the costs of voting will normally exceed the expected benefits. Because the chance of exercising the pivotal vote is minuscule compared to any realistic estimate of the private individual benefits of the different possible outcomes ...
However, Arrow's theorem is substantially broader, and can be applied to methods of social decision-making other than voting. It therefore generalizes Condorcet's voting paradox, and shows similar problems exist for every collective decision-making procedure based on relative comparisons. [1]
Social choice theory is a branch of welfare economics that extends the theory of rational choice to collective decision-making. [1] Social choice studies the behavior of different mathematical procedures ( social welfare functions ) used to combine individual preferences into a coherent whole.
However, the Greeks only used this paradox as an analogy in the context of the equilibrium of physical forces. [4] The 12th-century Persian scholar and philosopher Al-Ghazali discusses the application of this paradox to human decision making, asking whether it is possible to make a choice between equally good courses without grounds for ...
Paradoxes in utility theory (4 P) Pages in category "Decision-making paradoxes" The following 34 pages are in this category, out of 34 total.
Public choice theory is often used to explain how political decision-making results in outcomes that conflict with the general public's preferences. For example, many advocacy group and pork barrel projects are opposed by a majority of the populace, but it makes sense for politicians to support these projects.
In decision theory, the Ellsberg paradox (or Ellsberg's paradox) is a paradox in which people's decisions are inconsistent with subjective expected utility theory. John Maynard Keynes published a version of the paradox in 1921. [1] Daniel Ellsberg popularized the paradox in his 1961 paper, "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms". [2]