A St Petersburg Paradox for risky welfare aggregation

Analysis 81 (3):420-426 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The principle of Anteriority says that prospects that are identical from the perspective of every possible person’s welfare are equally good overall. The principle enjoys prima facie plausibility, and has been employed for various theoretical purposes. Here it is shown using an analogue of the St Petersburg Paradox that Anteriority is inconsistent with central principles of axiology.

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1093/analys/anaa079

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

The St. Petersburg gamble and risk.Paul Weirich - 1984 - Theory and Decision 17 (2):193-202.
A liberal paradox for judgment aggregation.Franz Dietrich & Christian List - 2008 - Social Choice and Welfare 31 (1):59-78.
Solving the St. Petersburg Paradox in cumulative prospect theory: the right amount of probability weighting.Marie Pfiffelmann - 2011 - Theory and Decision 71 (3):325-341.
On the normative dimension of the St. Petersburg paradox.David Teira - 2006 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 37 (2):210-223.
Entrance Fees and a Bayesian Approach to the St. Petersburg Paradox.Diego Marcondes, Cláudia Peixoto, Kdson Souza & Sergio Wechsler - 2017 - Philosophies 2 (2):11.
Arrow's theorem in judgment aggregation.Franz Dietrich & Christian List - 2007 - Social Choice and Welfare 29 (1):19-33.
Paradoxes of Rationality.Roy Sorensen - 2004 - In Alfred R. Mele & Piers Rawling (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Rationality. Oup Usa.
Infinite Prospects.Jeffrey Sanford Russell & Yoaav Isaacs - 2021 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 103 (1):178-198.
Welfare and Paradox.Robert Mabrito - 2013 - Journal of Philosophical Research 38:299-322.
Time, bounded utility, and the St. Petersburg paradox.Tyler Cowen & Jack High - 1988 - Theory and Decision 25 (3):219-223.
A Resource‐Rational, Process‐Level Account of the St. Petersburg Paradox.Ardavan S. Nobandegani & Thomas R. Shultz - 2020 - Topics in Cognitive Science 12 (1):417-432.
Two aggregation paradoxes in social decision making: the Ostrogorski paradox and the discursive dilemma.Gabriella Pigozzi - 2006 - Episteme 2 (2):119-128.
A paradox for some theories of welfare.Ben Bradley - 2007 - Philosophical Studies 133 (1):45 - 53.
The theory of judgment aggregation: an introductory review.Christian List - 2012 - Synthese 187 (1):179-207.
Inductive logic and the ravens paradox.Patrick Maher - 1999 - Philosophy of Science 66 (1):50-70.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-05-28

Downloads
607 (#27,604)

6 months
153 (#19,687)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Zachary Goodsell
National University of Singapore

Citations of this work

Non-Archimedean population axiologies.Calvin Baker - forthcoming - Economics and Philosophy.
Expected Choiceworthiness and Fanaticism.Calvin Baker - forthcoming - Philosophical Studies.
Probability discounting and money pumps.Petra Kosonen - forthcoming - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Reasons and Persons.Derek Parfit - 1984 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
Philosophy of logic.Willard Van Orman Quine - 1970 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Edited by Simon Blackburn & Keith Simmons.
The logic of paradox.Graham Priest - 1979 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 8 (1):219 - 241.
Equality and priority.Derek Parfit - 1997 - Ratio 10 (3):202–221.
Philosophy of Logic.W. V. O. Quine - 2005-01-01 - In José Medina & David Wood (eds.), Truth. Blackwell.

View all 17 references / Add more references