Plurality, approval, or Borda? A nineteenth century dispute on voting rules.

dc.contributor.authorEerik Lagerspetz
dc.contributor.organizationfi=filosofia|en=Philosophy|
dc.contributor.organization-code1.2.246.10.2458963.20.25750555531
dc.converis.publication-id17355815
dc.converis.urlhttps://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/Publication/17355815
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-28T13:42:14Z
dc.date.available2022-10-28T13:42:14Z
dc.description.abstract<p> </p><p><b>Abstract:</b> According to the oft-repeated story, the theory of social choice was invented by the eighteenth-century French mathematicians:  Borda. Condorcet, and Laplace. After their contributions, the subject is said to have fallen into oblivion. The aim of this article is to challenge this narrative by reviewing a nineteenth century discussion on the merits of different voting rules.  In that discussion the social choice results had a central role. The participants in the heated dispute were both professors at the University of Helsinki: Lorenz Lindelöf (1827-1908) was the Professor of Mathematics, a noted mathematician and statistician, while Johan Wilhelm Snellman (1806-1881) was the Professor of Philosophy and the unofficial intellectual leader of the Finnish national movement. Many of the arguments used by them also appear in modern treatments of social choice theory. Such basic anomalies of social choice as the Borda paradox, the Condorcet paradox, path-dependence, and strategic voting figured in the discussion. </p>
dc.format.pagerange265
dc.format.pagerange277
dc.identifier.eissn1573-7101
dc.identifier.jour-issn0048-5829
dc.identifier.olddbid183745
dc.identifier.oldhandle10024/166839
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.utupub.fi/handle/11111/41093
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi-fe2021042715713
dc.language.isoen
dc.okm.affiliatedauthorLagerspetz, Eerik
dc.okm.discipline517 Political scienceen_GB
dc.okm.discipline611 Philosophyen_GB
dc.okm.discipline615 History and archaeologyen_GB
dc.okm.discipline517 Valtio-oppi, hallintotiedefi_FI
dc.okm.discipline611 Filosofiafi_FI
dc.okm.discipline615 Historia ja arkeologiafi_FI
dc.okm.internationalcopublicationnot an international co-publication
dc.okm.internationalityInternational publication
dc.okm.typeA1 ScientificArticle
dc.publisherSpringer
dc.publisher.countryGermanyen_GB
dc.publisher.countrySaksafi_FI
dc.publisher.country-codeDE
dc.relation.doi10.1007/s11127-016-0361-4
dc.relation.ispartofjournalPublic Choice
dc.relation.issue3-4
dc.relation.volume168
dc.source.identifierhttps://www.utupub.fi/handle/10024/166839
dc.titlePlurality, approval, or Borda? A nineteenth century dispute on voting rules.
dc.year.issued2016

Tiedostot

Näytetään 1 - 1 / 1
Ladataan...
Name:
Snellman & Lindelöf PUBLIC CHOICE FINAL.docx
Size:
65.51 KB
Format:
Microsoft Word XML