Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    The social choice framework should be generalized to perm... — Carmelics
    Home/Consequentialism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The social choice framework should be generalized to permit consideration of information about individual utility functions, not only ordinal preferences.

    ConsequentialismDemocracy & Governance
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Arrow's impossibility theorem reveals limitations of frameworks restricted to preference orderings alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Ethically relevant evaluations such as distributional justice require richer informational inputs than ordinal preferences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Utility functions provide that richer informational basis.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Interpersonal utility comparisons lack objective epistemic foundations, as Robbins argued in 1932, making cardinal utility aggregation scientifically illegitimate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without a common unit of measurement for utility across persons, introducing utility functions imports pseudo-precision that masks irreducibly political value judgments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Ordinal preference frameworks, by avoiding spurious comparisons, honestly represent the limits of what welfare economics can rigorously establish.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Sen's capability approach demonstrates that utility functions systematically misrepresent welfare by ignoring adaptive preferences formed under deprivation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Individuals conditioned by unjust circumstances calibrate their utility functions to constrained options, so aggregating such functions entrenches rather than corrects injustice.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Richer informational bases for justice require objective metrics of functioning and capability, not subjective utility data that perpetuates preference distortion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    ConsequentialismDemocracy & Governance

    Connections

    1 topic

    Justice & Punishment1 linked

    Related

    Arrow's impossibility theorem reveals limitations of frameworks restricted to pr...Ethically relevant evaluations such as distributional justice require richer inf...Individuals conditioned by unjust circumstances calibrate their utility function...Interpersonal utility comparisons lack objective epistemic foundations, as Robbi...
    +5 moreShow less
    Ordinal preference frameworks, by avoiding spurious comparisons, honestly repres...Richer informational bases for justice require objective metrics of functioning ...Sen's capability approach demonstrates that utility functions systematically mis...Utility functions provide that richer informational basis.Without a common unit of measurement for utility across persons, introducing uti...

    Similar

    It is possible to construct a Bergson-Samuelson social welfare functio...81%Extended preference orderings and utility-based formulations are forma...80%Bergson and Samuelson held that individual utility functions are to be...78%The Bergson-Samuelson social welfare function can be constructed consi...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: economic-justice
    View source passageHide passage
    Sen (1970a) proposes a further generalization of the social choice framework, by permitting consideration of information about individual utility functions, not only preferences. This enlargement is motivated by the impossibility theorem, but also by the ethical relevance of various kinds of data. Distributional issues obviously require interpersonal comparisons of well-being. For instance, an egalitarian evaluation of allocations needs a determination of who the worst-off are. It is tempting to
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit