Approximations of rational criteria under complete ignorance and the independence axiom

1983 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mich�le Cohen ◽  
Jean-Yves Jaffray
Econometrica ◽  
1952 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 679 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Malinvaud

2003 ◽  
Vol 31 (S4) ◽  
pp. 33-40
Author(s):  
Angela Z. Monson ◽  
George E. Hardy ◽  
Ed Thompson

Thank you so much for the invitation to be here with you. It is always a pleasure to be with people who understand, believe in, and know the importance of public health. Those of us who work in the legislative arena know how infrequent it is to have dialogue and conversation with people who really have a good, tangible, hands-on working knowledge of health care, and particularly of public health.The notion of public health is an interesting one. It will range—if you talk to people in the legislature or out of the legislature—from just complete ignorance to total unawareness of what we mean by the words “public health.” When you talk to individuals like us in this room, we find a mixture of definitions, a mixture of understandings, and a mixture of appreciation as to what public health really is.


Econometrica ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 48 (5) ◽  
pp. 1281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Cohen ◽  
Jean-Yves Jaffray

Author(s):  
Albert Weale

From some points of view, Harsanyi stands apart from other theorists discussed in this book. He was a utilitarian, and he focuses on the hypothetical choices of a single individual. Nevertheless, his construction has been influential, and he has good claim to be the founder of the device of the veil of ignorance. He uses the orthodox utility theory of rationality to show that behind a veil of ignorance in which a hypothetical individual had an equal chance of being anyone in society, rationality would lead to that person adopting the principle of maximizing average utility. Utilitarianism can be represented as the maximizing choice of a rational individual behind the veil of ignorance. A central element in Harsanyi’s construction is the idea of ethical individualism, which he holds is captured in an axiom of independence defining the rationality of choice. He also revives the idea of the interpersonal comparability of utility. His reliance on interpersonal comparisons is a potential point of criticism, as is the argument that, strictly speaking, he has not shown that utilitarianism is required, as distinct from merely being consistent with, his principles of rational choice. A more fundamental criticism is that the phenomenon of preference reversals, well established in empirical literature, call into question the independence axiom. Preference reversals are intelligible. In relation to some cases, they suggest too an important distinction between rational choice and prudent choice.


2019 ◽  
Vol 301 ◽  
pp. 00002
Author(s):  
Masayuki Nakao ◽  
Kenji Iino

This paper proposes “Value Axiom” that states “The larger the sum of Customer Attribute values, the better the design.” A customer evaluates a design with the sum of the value produced by each Customer Attribute, expressing it with a monetary value such as Japanese yen. A designer can hardly estimate and express a perfect set of Customer Attributes at the early stage of a design. The designer writes down the design equation to visualize the entire design, and improves the sets of Design Parameters and Functional Requirements using the Independence Axiom and Information Axiom, and at the same time, it is also important to review the values of Customer Attributes using the Value Axiom.


1934 ◽  
Vol 28 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 156-158
Author(s):  
H. J. Rose

I. It has long been a standing puzzle why the women at the festival of Mater Matuta (the Matralia, June 11) prayed, not for their own children, but for their sisters' offspring. The attempts to connect it with any sociological phenomenon are purely absurd, and would not have been noticed but for their association with one or two famous names and the complete ignorance of non-European systems of relationship prevailing among the scholars of an older generation. There is no system under which a woman is closer akin to her sister's children than to her own; for under father-right a nephew or niece is further off than an own child, and if the system be pushed to the most logical and most absurd extremity, so as to make a child kin to his father only, not his mother, then he is also no kin to his mother's sister; under mother-right, which Rome never had in any form whatsoever, the mother is still nearer kin than the maternal aunt; while if ever there was, anywhere in the world, a classificatory system so pure and rigorous as to make no distinction between the actual mother and any other woman of the same age-class, then mother and aunt were in the same degree of kinship to every member of the younger generation. No ritual explanation I know will bear investigating. Yet the fact is handed down to us on good authority, probably that of Verrius Flaccus, the most likely common source for Ovid and Plutarch.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document