Talk:Arrow's impossibility theorem: Difference between revisions
→Finding EPOV on Arrow
Dr. Edmonds (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 62:
: That quote is taken from [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/arrows-theorem/#ScoGra here]. Read section 5.3 and 5.4 for the details. They get into some of the extensions and how people have tried to build a cardinal version of Arrows theorem. At this point there are two possibilities you could have to resist this. 1) You dispute what Stanford and Arrow himself are saying. If this is the case then we will have to agree to disagree. 2) You admit that Arrow's actual theorem does not cover cardinal systems but know cardinal systems are covers by OTHER theorems. You want to call all theorems "Arrows theorem" so as to hide the fact that Ordinal systems are more flawed than cardinal systems. If this is the case then you have a clear biased and malicious intent. --[[User:Dr. Edmonds|Dr. Edmonds]] ([[User talk:Dr. Edmonds|talk]]) 20:59, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
:: [[Dr. Edmonds]], quick point: STAR is covered by Arrow's Theorem. This is because it satisfies the majority criterion in the two-candidate case and thus fails IIA. So I recommend creating some terminology to cover only Approval and Score (and I think Majority Judgement also?) to ensure people don't get misled into thinking all cardinal methods are not covered by Arrow's Theorem. [[User:BetterVotingAdvocacy|BetterVotingAdvocacy]] ([[User talk:BetterVotingAdvocacy|talk]]) 18:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
| |||