Epistemic Democracy with Defensible Premises

Economics and Philosophy 29 (1):87--120 (2013)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
The contemporary theory of epistemic democracy often draws on the Condorcet Jury Theorem to formally justify the ‘wisdom of crowds’. But this theorem is inapplicable in its current form, since one of its premises – voter independence – is notoriously violated. This premise carries responsibility for the theorem's misleading conclusion that ‘large crowds are infallible’. We prove a more useful jury theorem: under defensible premises, ‘large crowds are fallible but better than small groups’. This theorem rehabilitates the importance of deliberation and education, which appear inessential in the classical jury framework. Our theorem is related to Ladha's (1993) seminal jury theorem for interchangeable (‘indistinguishable’) voters based on de Finetti's Theorem. We also prove a more general and simpler such jury theorem.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
DIEEDW
Upload history
First archival date: 2020-04-23
Latest version: 2 (2020-04-23)
View other versions
Added to PP index
2013-10-07

Total views
149 ( #37,423 of 2,454,490 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
19 ( #33,342 of 2,454,490 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.