Find counter arguments by entering NameVs… or …VsName.
The author or concept searched is found in the following 11 entries.
| Disputed term/author/ism | Author |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Civilization | Condorcet | Habermas III 214 Civilization/Condorcet/Habermas: Both Condorcet and Kant see the progress of civilization as being in line with a republic that guarantees civil liberties, an international order that brings about lasting peace, a society that accelerates economic growth and technological progress and eliminates or at the same time compensates for social inequalities. (1) >Inequalities, >Peace, >Technology, >Republic, >Liberty, >Growth, >Society. 1. Condorcet, Entwurf einer historischen Darstellung der Fortschritte des menschlichen Geistes, (Ed.) W. Alff, Frankfurt, 1963, p. 383. |
Condo I N. de Condorcet Tableau historique des progrès de l’ esprit humain Paris 2004 Ha I J. Habermas Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne Frankfurt 1988 Ha III Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. I Frankfurt/M. 1981 Ha IV Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. II Frankfurt/M. 1981 |
| Condorcet Jury Theorem | Condorcet | Parisi I 494 Condorcet Jury Theorem/Condorcet/Nitzan/Paroush: Condorcet (1785)(1) makes the following three-part statement: 1) The probability that a team of decision-makers would collectively make the correct decision is higher than the probability that any single member of the team makes such a decision. 2) This advantage of the team over the individual performance monotonically increases with the size of the team. Parisi I 495 3) There is a complete certainty that the team’s decision is right if the size of the team tends to infinity, that is, the probability of this event tends to one with the team’s size. A “Condorcet Jury Theorem” (henceforth, CJT) is a formulation of sufficient conditions that validate the above statements. There are many CJTs, but Laplace (1815)(2) was the first to propose such a theorem. >Condorcet Jury Theorem/Laplace. Parisi I 496 VsCondorcet: In contrast to the first two parts of Condorcet’s statement, the survival of the third part is somehow surprising. Many attempts have been made to prove the validity of the third part in case of heterogeneous teams (see Boland, 1989(3); Fey, 2003(4); Kanazawa, 1998(5); and Owen, Grofman, and Feld, 1989(6)). 1. De Condorcet, N. C. (1785). Essai sur l’application de l’analyse a la probabilite des decisions rendues a la pluralite des voix. Paris: De l’imprimerie royale. 2. Laplace, P. S. de (1815). Theorie analytique des probabilities. Paris: n.p. 3. Boland, P. J. (1989). “Majority systems and the Condorcet jury theorem.” The Statistician 38(3): 181–189. 4. Fey, M. (2003). “A note on the Condorcet jury theorem with supermajority rules.” Social Choice and Welfare 20(1): 27-32. 5. Kanazawa, S. (1998). “A brief note on a further refinement of Condorcet Jury Theorem for heterogenous groups.” Mathematical Social Sciences 35(1): 69-73. 6. Owen, G., B. Grofman, and S. Feld (1989). “Proving a distribution free generalization of the Condorcet jury theorem.” Mathematical Social Sciences 17(1): 1-16. Shmuel Nitzan and Jacob Paroush. “Collective Decision-making and the Jury Theorems”. In: Parisi, Francesco (ed) (2017). The Oxford Handbook of Law and Economics. Vol 1: Methodology and Concepts. NY: Oxford University. |
Condo I N. de Condorcet Tableau historique des progrès de l’ esprit humain Paris 2004 Parisi I Francesco Parisi (Ed) The Oxford Handbook of Law and Economics: Volume 1: Methodology and Concepts New York 2017 |
| Death | Condorcet | Habermas III 214 Death/Condorcet/Habermas: Condorcet (1795)(1) expects the hygienic and medical overcoming of misery and illness; he believes that "a time must come when death will only be the result of extraordinary circumstances". (1) Habermas: in other words: Condorcet believes in eternal life before death. This concept is representative of the historical philosophical thinking of the 18th century. However, it is precisely the radicalism that makes the fractures of historical philosophical thought come to the fore. HabermasVsCondorcet: For its linear concept of progress, Condorcet must presuppose that 1st the history of physics and the sciences oriented on its model can be reconstructed as a continuous path of development; Habermas III 215 2nd that all problems to which religious and philosophical teachings have so far provided answers can either be translated into problems that can be scientifically worked on or seen through as apparent problems. 3rd Condorcet presupposes the idea of a universal reason, which he himself cannot overlook as a child of the 18th century. VsCondorcet: This idea is first questioned by the Historical School and later by cultural anthropology. >Progress, >Technology, >Enlightenment, >Cultural anthropology. 1. Condorcet, Entwurf einer historischen Darstellung der Fortschritte des menschlichen Geistes, (Ed.) W. Alff, Frankfurt, 1963, p. 383. |
Condo I N. de Condorcet Tableau historique des progrès de l’ esprit humain Paris 2004 Ha I J. Habermas Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne Frankfurt 1988 Ha III Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. I Frankfurt/M. 1981 Ha IV Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. II Frankfurt/M. 1981 |
| Decision Theory | Condorcet | Sunstein I 25 Decision Theory/Collective Intelligence/Condorcet/Sunstein: the accuracy of the judgments to which statistically selected groups arrive is best explained by Condorcet's theorem. (1) Def Jury Theorem/Condorcet/Sunstein: in the case of a yes/no question with a 50% chance for each of the two outputs, the probability of a correct answer tends towards 100% if the size of the asked group increases. Sunstein: Groups here are better than individuals and larger groups better than small ones, as long as two conditions are met: 1. the majority rule is applied, 2. each person is probably more likely to be right than wrong. I 26 The phenomenal success of websites such as the Zagat Survey (which deals with restaurant ratings etc.) is due to Condorcet's Jury Theorem. (2) Democracy/Sunstein: even for justifications of democracy the theorem is used. (3) >Democracy, >Collective intelligence. I 27 Conditions/Condorcet: 1. It should not matter to the participants whether their votes would be decisive. 2. The parties involved should not be influenced by the votes of the others. 3. The likelihood that a participant is right should be statistically independent of the likelihood that another participant is right. (4) I 28 Sunstein: it turned out that the Jury Theorem also applies if the 3rd condition is violated. (5) Problems/Sunstein: if the probability of group members being wrong increases, the probability of a wrong overall result increases, too. I 29 There are examples of groups in which misconceptions prevail: For example, 93% of Americans believe that Arab terrorists destroyed the World Trade Center, but only 11% of Kuwaitis believe this. In order for Condorcet's theorem to be applied, we must assume a certain level of information from the participants. >Information. I 42 Errors: in many areas of knowledge, groups of participants do not have purely accidental errors, but there is a certain system of misconceptions. >Errors, >Deceptions, >Misinformation. 1. See William P. Bottom et al., “Propagation of Individual Bias through Group Judgment: Error in the Treatment of Asymmetrically Informative Signals,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 25 (2002): 152–54. 2. See Zagat Survey Web site, http://www.zagat.com/about/about.aspx. 3. See Goodin, Reflective Democracy, 91–108. 4. Siehe . Bottom et al., “Propagation of Individual Bias through Group Judgment, p. 153 5. ibid. |
Condo I N. de Condorcet Tableau historique des progrès de l’ esprit humain Paris 2004 Sunstein I Cass R. Sunstein Infotopia: How Many Minds Produce Knowledge Oxford 2008 Sunstein II Cass R. Sunstein #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media Princeton 2017 |
| Enlightenment | Condorcet | Habermas III 212 Enlightenment/Condorcet/Habermas: Enlightenment becomes ((s) at Condorcet's time) the practical term for the emancipation of prejudices through the practically momentous dissemination of scientific knowledge. In Condorcet's words: for the impact of philosophy on public opinion. Scientists must make the principles of their own work into principles of social intercourse in general.(1) >Prejudice, >Science, >Knowledge, >Recognition, >Empiricism, >Rationalism. 1. Condorcet, Entwurf einer historischen Darstellung der Fortschritte des menschlichen Geistes, (Ed.) W. Alff, Frankfurt, 1963, p. 275. |
Condo I N. de Condorcet Tableau historique des progrès de l’ esprit humain Paris 2004 Ha I J. Habermas Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne Frankfurt 1988 Ha III Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. I Frankfurt/M. 1981 Ha IV Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. II Frankfurt/M. 1981 |
| Gender Roles | Condorcet | Habermas III 214 Gender roles/Condorcet/Habermas: Among other things, Condorcet expects the elimination of the prejudices "which have created an inequality of rights between the two sexes".(1) ((s) Condorcet wrote 1795.) >Prejudice, >Equal rights. 1. Condorcet, Entwurf einer historischen Darstellung der Fortschritte des menschlichen Geistes, hrsg. von W. Alff, Frankfurt, 1963, S. 383. |
Condo I N. de Condorcet Tableau historique des progrès de l’ esprit humain Paris 2004 Ha I J. Habermas Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne Frankfurt 1988 Ha III Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. I Frankfurt/M. 1981 Ha IV Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. II Frankfurt/M. 1981 |
| History | Condorcet | Wilson I 29 History/Condorcet/Wilson, E. O.: (Condorcet 1793)(1). Wilson: Condorcet's text contains no reference to the revolution. Condorcet wrote as if history was inevitable and as if wars like revolutions were only Europe's way of giving itself a new order over and over again. >Revolution. I 30 Culture/Condorcet/Wilson: his calm confidence grew out of the belief that culture is governed by laws as precise as physics. We would only have to understand them in order to keep humanity on its predetermined course towards a better social order, regulated and determined by science and secular philosophy. All these laws could be derived from the study of history. >Progress, >Culture, >Scientism, >Rationalism. 1. Condorcet, Esquisse d'un tableau historique des progrès de l' esprit humain, 1793. |
Condo I N. de Condorcet Tableau historique des progrès de l’ esprit humain Paris 2004 WilsonEO I E. O. Wilson Consilience. The Unity of Knowledge, New York 1998 German Edition: Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge New York 1998 |
| Intelligence | Condorcet | Habermas III 211 Intelligence/Condorcet/Habermas: Condorcet characterizes the "constitution of our intelligence" by the "relationship between our means of discovering the truth and the resistance with which nature opposes our efforts." (1) See also Progress/Condorcet and Perfection/Condorcet. 1. Condorcet, Entwurf einer historischen Darstellung der Fortschritte des menschlichen Geistes, (Ed.) W. Alff, Frankfurt, 1963, p. 253 |
Condo I N. de Condorcet Tableau historique des progrès de l’ esprit humain Paris 2004 Ha I J. Habermas Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne Frankfurt 1988 Ha III Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. I Frankfurt/M. 1981 Ha IV Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. II Frankfurt/M. 1981 |
| Jury Theorem | Condorcet | Gaus I 148 Jury theorem/Condorcet/Dryzek: This theorem demonstrates that if each citizen has a better than even chance of being correct in his/her judgement, then the larger the number of voters, the greater the chance of the majority choosing the correct option. The jury theorem therefore justifies the rationality of majoritarian democracy, at least in a republican context of a search for the common good, though only if each citizen reaches and exercises independent judgement. So there should be no factions (which reduce the effective number of voters) and, it might seem, no communication. These, at least, were Rousseau's own views: deliberation should only be a matter of internal reflection, not communication. However, as Robert Goodin (2002(1): 125) and others point out, discussion is fine so long as people then subsequently exercise their own independent judgements when voting. >Democracy/Dryzek, >Deliberative Democray/Dryzek. Problems with deliberation and democracy: If democracy involves aggregation (however much it is downplayed by deliberative democrats), that can be across judgements and not just across preferences as emphasized in social choice theory. Such judgements can involve disagreement over (say) what is in the common good. This epistemic way of thinking about democracy is associated with Rousseau, according to whom the general will can be ascertained by voting. Bernard Grofman and Scott Feld (1988)(2) argue that if indeed there is such a thing as the common good, though people differ in their judgements about which option will best serve it, then Condorcet's jury theorem applies. 1 Goodin, Robert E. (2002) Reflective Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2. Grofman, Bernard and Scott Feld (1988) 'Rousseau's general will: a Condorcetian perspective'. American Political Science Review, 82: 567-76. Dryzek, John S. 2004. „Democratic Political Theory“. In: Gaus, Gerald F. & Kukathas, Chandran 2004. Handbook of Political Theory. SAGE Publications Parisi I 494 Jury theorem/Condorcet/Nitzan/Paroush: The Marquis de Condorcet (1743–1794) is considered one of the pioneers of the social sciences. In the English literature, Baker (1976)(1) and Black (1958)(2) were among the first to turn the attention of the scientific community to the importance of Condorcet’s writings (see Young, 1995)(3). In 1785 no jury existed in France. Condorcet applied probability theory to judicial questions and argued that the English demand for unanimity among jurors was unreasonable, suggesting instead a jury of twelve members that can convict with a majority of at least ten. >Condorcet Jury Theorem, >Decision-making processes. 1. Baker, M. K., ed. (1976). Condorcet: selected writings. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill. 2. Black, D. (1958). The Theory of Committees and Elections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 3. Young, P. (1995). “Optimal Voting Rules.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 9(1): 51–64. Shmuel Nitzan and Jacob Paroush. “Collective Decision-making and the Jury Theorems”. In: Parisi, Francesco (ed) (2017). The Oxford Handbook of Law and Economics. Vol 1: Methodology and Concepts. NY: Oxford University. |
Condo I N. de Condorcet Tableau historique des progrès de l’ esprit humain Paris 2004 Gaus I Gerald F. Gaus Chandran Kukathas Handbook of Political Theory London 2004 Parisi I Francesco Parisi (Ed) The Oxford Handbook of Law and Economics: Volume 1: Methodology and Concepts New York 2017 |
| Perfection | Condorcet | Habermas III 211 Perfection/Condorcet/Habermas: Condorcet reinterprets the concept of perfection according to the pattern of scientific progress. Perfection no longer means, as in the Aristotelian tradition, the realization of a telos inherent in the nature of things, but a process of perfection that is directed but not teleologically limited in advance. Perfection is interpreted as progress.(1) >Progress, >Teleology. 1. Condorcet, Entwurf einer historischen Darstellung der Fortschritte des menschlichen Geistes, hrsg. von W. Alff, Frankfurt, 1963,S. 29 |
Condo I N. de Condorcet Tableau historique des progrès de l’ esprit humain Paris 2004 Ha I J. Habermas Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne Frankfurt 1988 Ha III Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. I Frankfurt/M. 1981 Ha IV Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. II Frankfurt/M. 1981 |
| Progress | Condorcet | Habermas III 211 Progress/Condorcet/Habermas: the concept of progress is linked to the idea of learning. The human mind does not owe its progress to the approach to a telos, but to the unhindered confirmation of its intelligence, i.e. a learning mechanism. Learning means the intelligent overcoming of obstacles; Condorcet characterizes the "constitution of our intelligence" by the "relationship between our means of discovering the truth and the resistance with which nature opposes our efforts".(1) >Intelligence/Condorcet, >Learning. Habermas III 214 Like Kant, Condorcet sees the progress of civilisation along the lines of a republic that guarantees civil liberties, an international order that brings about lasting peace, a society that accelerates economic growth and technological progress and abolishes or nevertheless compensates social inequalities.(2) >Civilization, >Technology, >Perfection, >Inequalities. 1. Condorcet, Entwurf einer historischen Darstellung der Fortschritte des menschlichen Geistes, hrsg. von W. Alff, Frankfurt, 1963, p. 253. 2. Ibid. p. 383. |
Condo I N. de Condorcet Tableau historique des progrès de l’ esprit humain Paris 2004 Ha I J. Habermas Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne Frankfurt 1988 Ha III Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. I Frankfurt/M. 1981 Ha IV Jürgen Habermas Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Bd. II Frankfurt/M. 1981 |
| |||
No results. Please choose an author or concept or try a different keyword-search.