小修正案的论据：它们是如何起作用的，有什么作用，没有什么作用

IF 0.9 4区经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS

Theory and Decision Pub Date : 2024-08-27 DOI:10.1007/s11238-024-10002-2

Martin van Hees, Akshath Jitendranath, Roland Iwan Luttens

{"title":"小修正案的论据：它们是如何起作用的，有什么作用，没有什么作用","authors":"Martin van Hees, Akshath Jitendranath, Roland Iwan Luttens","doi":"10.1007/s11238-024-10002-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The small improvement argument has been said to establish that the standard weak preference or value relation can be incomplete. We first show that the argument is one of three possible ‘small amendment arguments’, each of which would yield the same conclusion. Generalizing the analysis thus, we subsequently present a strong and a weak version of small amendment arguments and derive the exact rationality conditions under which they reveal incompleteness. The results show that the arguments (in any of their variants) need not reveal a problem for the possibility of rational choice. In fact, it can be argued that they only reveal such a problem if the underlying relation is complete rather than incomplete.</p>","PeriodicalId":47535,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Decision","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Small amendment arguments: how they work and what they do and do not show\",\"authors\":\"Martin van Hees, Akshath Jitendranath, Roland Iwan Luttens\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11238-024-10002-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The small improvement argument has been said to establish that the standard weak preference or value relation can be incomplete. We first show that the argument is one of three possible ‘small amendment arguments’, each of which would yield the same conclusion. Generalizing the analysis thus, we subsequently present a strong and a weak version of small amendment arguments and derive the exact rationality conditions under which they reveal incompleteness. The results show that the arguments (in any of their variants) need not reveal a problem for the possibility of rational choice. In fact, it can be argued that they only reveal such a problem if the underlying relation is complete rather than incomplete.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47535,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Theory and Decision\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Theory and Decision\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-024-10002-2\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Decision","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-024-10002-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

有人说，"小改进论证 "证明了标准的弱偏好或价值关系可能是不完整的。我们首先证明，该论证是三种可能的 "小修正论证 "之一，每种论证都会得出相同的结论。在此基础上，我们对分析进行了归纳，随后提出了一个强弱版本的小修正论证，并推导出它们揭示不完备性的确切理性条件。结果表明，这些论证（其任何变体）都不必揭示理性选择可能性的问题。事实上，可以说只有当基本关系是完整的而不是不完整的时候，它们才会揭示出这样一个问题。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Small amendment arguments: how they work and what they do and do not show

The small improvement argument has been said to establish that the standard weak preference or value relation can be incomplete. We first show that the argument is one of three possible ‘small amendment arguments’, each of which would yield the same conclusion. Generalizing the analysis thus, we subsequently present a strong and a weak version of small amendment arguments and derive the exact rationality conditions under which they reveal incompleteness. The results show that the arguments (in any of their variants) need not reveal a problem for the possibility of rational choice. In fact, it can be argued that they only reveal such a problem if the underlying relation is complete rather than incomplete.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Theory and Decision Multiple-

CiteScore

1.60

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The field of decision has been investigated from many sides. However, research programs relevant to decision making in psychology, management science, economics, the theory of games, statistics, operations research, artificial intelligence, cognitive science and analytical philosophy have remained separate. Theory and Decision is devoted to all aspects of decision making belonging to such programs, but addresses also possible cross-fertilizations between these disciplines which would represent effective advances in knowledge. The purpose of the journal is to let the engineering of choice gradually emerge both for individual and for collective decision making. Formalized treatments will be favoured, to the extent that they provide new insights into the issues raised and an appropriate modeling of the situation considered. Due to its growing importance, expermentation in decision making as well as its links to the cognitive sciences will be granted special attention by Theory and Decision. Of particular interest are: Preference and belief modeling, Experimental decision making under risk or under uncertainty, Decision analysis, multicriteria decision modeling, Game theory, negotiation theory, collective decision making, social choice, Rationality, cognitive processes and interactive decision making, Methodology of the decision sciences. Applications to various problems in management and organization science, economics and finance, computer-supported decision schemes, will be welcome as long as they bear on sufficiently general cases. Analysis of actual decision making processes are also relevant topics for the journal, whether pertaining to individual, collective or negotiatory approaches; to private decisions or public policies; to operations or to strategic choices. Officially cited as: Theory Decis