Abstract
It is often suggested that when opinions differ among individuals in a group, the opinions should be aggregated to form a compromise. This paper compares two approaches to aggregating opinions, linear pooling and what I call opinion agglomeration. In evaluating both strategies, I propose a pragmatic criterion, No Regrets, entailing that an aggregation strategy should prevent groups from buying and selling bets on events at prices regretted by their members. I show that only opinion agglomeration is able to satisfy the demand. I then proceed to give normative and empirical arguments in support of the pragmatic criterion for opinion aggregation, and that ultimately favor opinion agglomeration.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 473-495 |
| Journal | Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy |
| Volume | 8 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 13 Dec 2021 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Regret Averse Opinion Aggregation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver