Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Arrow's impossibility theorem can also be avoided by relaxing Independence of Irrelevant Utilities alone, without introducing cardinal utility comparisons.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Weakening IIU to depend on indifference curves at relevant alternatives still smuggles in interpersonal comparability via the geometry of indifference maps.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Pazner's own framework requires that indifference curves be comparable across persons to generate a social ordering, violating strict ordinalism.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Thus relaxing IIU alone does not escape Arrow's theorem without implicitly introducing the cardinal structure the claim purports to avoid.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Sen (1977) demonstrated that escaping Arrow's theorem requires either cardinal utility information or expanded interpersonal comparability, not merely axiom weakening.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Relaxing IIU without cardinal utility leaves the social welfare function vulnerable to Sen's own impossibility results on minimal liberty and Pareto consistency.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Arrow's impossibility requires both Independence of Irrelevant Utilities and ordinal non-comparability
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Relaxing Independence of Irrelevant Utilities independently is a logically distinct escape route from the impossibility
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Hansson (1973) and Pazner (1979) proposed weakenings of Arrow's axiom that make rankings depend on indifference curves at the relevant alternatives
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.