A GENERALIZATION OF THE PARETIAN LIBERAL PARADOX

Yıl 1999, , 139 - 149, 10.06.1999

Ahmet Kara

https://doi.org/10.14783/maruoneri.691206

Öz

Bu makale, Paretian Liberal Paradoksu 'nu geçişken olmayan tercihleri kapsayacak şekilde genelleştirmekte ve genelleştirilmiş paradoksun ortadan kalkacağı bazı koşulları belirlemektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

paretian paradoksu

Kaynakça

• [1] Sen. A. 1970. Collective Choice and Social Welfare. San Francisco: Holden-Day.
• [2] Ng. Y.K. 1971. "The Possibility of a Paretian Liberal: Impossibility Theorems andCardinal Utility." Journal of Political Economy 79: 1397-1402.
• [3J Gibbard, A. 1974. "A Pareto Consistent Libertarian Claim." Journal of Economic Theory 7: 388-410.
• [4] Aldrich. .1. 1977. "The Dilemma of a Paretian Liberal: Some Consequences of Sen's Theorem." Public Choice 30: 1-22.
• [5] Breyer. F. 1977. "The liberal Paradox. Decisiveness over Issues and Domain Restrictions." Z Nationalökonomie 37: 45-60.
• [6] Pressler, .1. 1987. "Rights and Social Choice: Is There a Paretian Libertarian Paradox." Economics and Philosophy 3: 1-22.
• [71 Kelsey. D. 1988. "What is Responsible for the Paretian Epidemic?" Social Choice and Welfare 5: 303-306.
• [8j Suzumura. K. 1990. "Voluntary Exchange of Rights and the Liberal Paradox." Economic Review (Keizai- Kenkyu) 41 (2): 129-136.
• [9] Kara. A. 1999a. "A Paradox of Social Rationality: Are There Choice Contexts Where Individual Irrationality is More Conducive Than Individual Rationality to Producing Rational Social Preferences?" Rationality and Society. forthcoming
• [101 Kara. A. 1999b. "A Utilitarian Resolution of the Paretian Liberal Paradox. "Öneri: Marmara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 2(11): 101-103.
• 1111 Tversky. A. 1969. "Intransitivity of Preferences." Psychological Review ~6: 31-48.
• 1121 May. K. 1954. "Intransitivity. Utility and the Aggregation of Preference Patterns." Econometrica 22: 1- 13.
• 1131 MacC'rimmon. K.R. and S. Larsson. 1979. "Utility Theory: Axioms versus "Paradoxes"." In Expected Utility Hypotheses and the Allais Paradox. M. Allais and O. Hagen (eds). Dordrecht. Holland: D. Reidel.
• [14] Fishburn. P.C. 1984. "SSB Utility Theory: An Economic Perspective. "Mathematical Social Science 8: 63-94.
• [15] Steedman. I. and U. Krause. 1986. "Goethe's Faust. Arrow's Impossibility Theorem and the Individual Decision- faker." In Multiple Self. .1. Elster (ed.[.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• [16] Weinstein. A.A. 1968. "Individual Preference Intransitivity." Southern Economic Journal 34: 335-343.
• [17] Bar-Hillel. M. and A. Margalit. 1988. "How Vicious are Cycles oflntransitive Choice?" Theory and Decision 24: 1 19-145.