Information for "Condorcet paradox"

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Basic information

Display titleCondorcet paradox
Default sort keyCondorcet paradox
Page length (in bytes)8,890
Page ID480
Page content languageen - English
Page content modelwikitext
Indexing by robotsAllowed
Number of redirects to this page3
Counted as a content pageYes
Number of subpages of this page0 (0 redirects; 0 non-redirects)

Page protection

EditAllow all users (infinite)
MoveAllow all users (infinite)
DeleteAllow all users (infinite)
View the protection log for this page.

Edit history

Page creatorimported>WikipediaBot
Date of page creation20:55, 26 January 2005
Latest editorBetterVotingAdvocacy (talk | contribs)
Date of latest edit21:25, 9 April 2020
Total number of edits24
Total number of distinct authors5
Recent number of edits (within past 180 days)0
Recent number of distinct authors0

Page properties

Transcluded templates (2)

Templates used on this page:

SEO properties



Article description: (description)
This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements.
The voting paradox, Condorcet paradox, or Condorcet cycle is when within a set of candidates, no one candidate is preferred by at least as many voters as all the other candidates in the set when looking at their pairwise matchups. It essentially means that within that set of candidates, no matter which candidate you pick, more voters always prefer some other candidate in the set. If there is a Condorcet cycle for 1st place (the winner), then all candidates in the cycle will be in the Smith set. It is a situation noted by the Marquis de Condorcet in the late 18th century, in which collective preferences can be cyclic (i.e. not transitive), even if the preferences of individual voters are not i.e. between three candidates, the first can be preferred by a majority over the second, and the second by a majority over the third, yet the first candidate isn't preferred by a majority over the third, or even, the third candidate can be preferred by a majority over the first candidate. This is paradoxical, because it means that majority wishes can be in conflict with each other. When this occurs, it is because the conflicting majorities are each made up of different groups of individuals.
Information from Extension:WikiSEO