Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-01T02:58:06.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Choosing the Best Social Order: New Principles of Justice and Normative Dimensions of Choice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Grzegorz Lissowski  and
Piotr Swistak
Grzegorz Lissowski
Affiliation:
University of Warsaw
Piotr Swistak
Affiliation:
University of Maryland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There are many standard rules of aggregating individual preferences; majority rule is but one example. These rules determine what we typically consider to be a fair or a just solution to the problem of social choice. Yet we know very little, either about how these solutions relate to what a person, not a rule, would choose as a fair outcome or about what ethical or political beliefs would guide people in their choices. An empirical study was conducted to address these problems. As standard normative solutions fail to explain choices obtained in the study, we propose a new set of solutions, which generalize two classical principles of justice: Rawlsian and conservative. These generalized solutions fit the data remarkably well. More important, they uncover two normative dimensions within which choices turn out to be very consistent. These dimensions, we conjecture, indicate subjects' underlying attitudes. We use this theory to compare ethical-political attitudes in samples from Poland, Japan, and the United States.

Type
Articles
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 89 , Issue 1 , March 1995 , pp. 74 - 96
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arrow, Kenneth J. 1963. Social Choice and Individual Values. 2d ed.New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Black, Duncan. 1958. The Theory of Committees and Elections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bogart, Kenneth P. 1973. “Preference Structures I: Distances between Transitive Preference Relations.” Journal of Mathematical Sociology 3:49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ebbesen, Ebbe B., and Konecni, Vladimir. 1980. “On the External Validity of Decision-making Research: What Do We Know about Decisions in the Real World?” In Cognitive Processes in Choice and Decision Behavior, ed. Wallsten, T. S.. Hillsdale: Earlbaum.Google Scholar
Fishburn, Peter C. 1986. “Empirical Comparisons of Voting Procedures.” Behavioral Science 31:82–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frohlich, Norman, Oppenheimer, Joe, and Eavy, Cheryl. 1987. “Choices of Principles of Distributive Justice in Experimental Groups.” American Journal of Political Science 31:606–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frohlich, Norman, and Oppenheimer, Joe. 1992. Choosing Justice: An Experimental Approach to Ethical Theory. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gärdenfors, Peter. 1973. “Positionalist Voting Functions.” Theory and Decision 4:1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, Jerry S. 1978. Arrow Impossibility Theorems. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Kemeny, John G. 1959. “Mathematics without Numbers.” Daedalus 88:577–91.Google Scholar
Kemeny, John G., and Snell, Laurie. 1962. Mathematical Models in the Social Sciences. New York: Ginn.Google Scholar
Kern, Lucian. 1978. “Comparative Distributive Ethics.” In Decision Theory and Social Ethics, ed. Gottinger, Hans Werner and Leinfellner, Werner. Amsterdam: Reidel.Google Scholar
Lissowski, Grzegorz. 1986. “On the Principles of Distributive Justice.” Oeconomica Poiana 4:473–89.Google Scholar
Lissowski, Grzegorz. 1993a. “Empirical Evaluation of the Probabilistic Principles of Distributive Justice.” Polish Sociological Review 3(103):249–61.Google Scholar
Lissowski, Grzegorz. 1993b. “Oceny podziałów dóbr: Zasady sprawiedliwości a poczucie sprawiedliwości ludzi” [Evaluations of distributions of goods: Principles of justice versus peoples' perception of justice]. Studia Socjologiczne 1(128): 29–50.Google Scholar
Lissowski, Grzegorz. 1994. “Ustalanie sposobu podziahu dóbr w sytuacji eksperymentalnej [Determining a Method of Dividing a Good in an Experimental Situation].” Studia Socjologiczne 3–4:173–215.Google Scholar
Lissowski, Grzegorz, Tyszka, Tadeusz, and Okrasa, Włodzimierz. 1991. “Principles of Distributive Justice: Experiments in Poland and America.” Journal of Conflkt Resolution 35:98–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
May, Kenneth O. 1952. “A Set of Independent Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Simple Majority Decision.” Econometrica 20:680–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller, Dennis C. 1989. Public Choice II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, John. 1974. “Some Reasons for the Maximum Criterion.” American Economic Review 64:141–46.Google Scholar
Riker, William H. 1988. Liberalism against Populism. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya K. 1970. Collective Choice and Social Welfare. San Francisco: Holden-Day.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya K. 1974. “Rawls Versus Bentham: An Axiomatic Examination of the Pure Distribution Problem.” Theory and Decision 4:301–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sołtan, Karol. 1987. The Causal Theory of Justice. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Suppes, Patrick. 1966. “Some Formal Models of Grading Principles.” Synthese 16:284–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suzumura, Kotaro. 1983. Rational Choice, Collective Decisions, and Social Welfare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomiyama, Yoshinori, and Sayeki, Yutaka. 1982. “Evaluation and Modification of Voting Consequences by Mean-Variance Analysis of Voters' Satisfaction.” Behaviormetrika 12:97–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yaari, Menahem E., and Bar-Hillel, Maya. 1982. “On Dividing Justly.” Social Choice and Welfare 1:1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, H. Peyton. 1974. “An Axiomatization of Borda's Rule. Journal of Economic Theory 9:43–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.