A note on selecting maximals in finite spaces

Given a choice problem, the maximization rule may select many alternatives. In such cases, it is common practice to interpret that the final choice will end up being made by some random procedure, assigning to any maximal alternative the same probability of being chosen. However, there may be reasons based on the same original preferences for which it is suitable to select certain maximal alternatives over others. This paper introduces two choice criteria induced by the original preferences such that maximizing with respect to each of them may give a finer selection of alternatives than maximizing with respect to the original preferences. Those criteria are built by means of several preference relations induced by the original preferences, namely, two (weak) dominance relations, two indirect preference relations and the dominance relations defined with the help of those indirect preferences. It is remarkable that as the original preferences approach being complete and transitive, those criteria become both simpler and closer to such preferences. In particular, they coincide with the original preferences when these are complete and transitive, in which case they provide the same solution as those preference

A non-proposition-wise variant of majority voting for aggregating judgments

Majority voting is commonly used in aggregating judgments. The literature to date on judgment aggregation (JA) has focused primarily on proposition-wise majority voting (PMV). Given a set of issues on which a group is trying to make collective judgments, PMV aggregates individual judgments issue by issue, and satisfies a salient property of JA rules—independence. This paper introduces a variant of majority voting called holistic majority voting (HMV). This new variant also meets the condition of independence. However, instead of aggregating judgments issue by issue, it aggregates individual judgments en bloc. A salient and straightforward feature of HMV is that it guarantees the logical consistency of the propositions expressing collective judgments, provided that the individual points of view are consistent. This feature contrasts with the known inability of PMV to guarantee the consistency of the collective outcome. Analogously, while PMV may present a set of judgments that have been rejected by everyone in the group as collectively accepted, the collective judgments returned by HMV have been accepted by a majority of individuals in the group and, therefore, rejected by a minority of them at most. In addition, HMV satisfies a large set of appealing properties, as PMV also does. However, HMV may not return any complete proposition expressing the judgments of the group on all the issues at stake, even in cases where PMV does. Moreover, demanding completeness from HMV leads to impossibility results similar to the known impossibilities on PMV and on proposition-wise JA rules in genera

Building and Using Models as Examples

Sometimes, theoreticians explicitly state that they consider their models as examples. When this is not the case, it is fairly common for theoreticians to attribute to their models the characteristics and objectives of illustrative examples. However, this way of understanding models has not received enough attention in the methodological literature focused on economics. Given that didactic examples and their properties are extremely familiar in practice, considering theoretical models as examples can offer a useful perspective on models and their properties. On the basis of both explanatory and exemplifying role played by the deductive arguments by which results are proved, the paper emphasizes also the importance of understanding in theoretical work, the analogical and tentative character of the application of models, the central role played by the above mentioned arguments in such application, the didactic function of theory, and the transmision of plausibility from those arguments to the results obtained.models; examples; explanatory arguments; theoretical understanding; analogical application

A pooling approach to judgment aggregation

The literature has focused on a particular way of aggregating judgments: Given a set of yes or no questions or issues, the individuals’ judgments are then aggregated separately, issue by issue. Applied in this way, the majority method does not guarantee the logical consistency of the set of judgments obtained. This fact has been the focus of critiques of the majority method and similar procedures. This paper focuses on another way of aggregating judgments. The main difference is that aggregation is made en bloc on all the issues at stake. The main consequence is that the majority method applied in this way does always guarantee the logical consistency of the collective judgments. Since it satisfies a large set of attractive properties, it should provide the basis for more positive assessment if applied using the proposed pooling approach than if used separately. The paper extends the analysis to the pooling supermajority and plurality rules, with similar result

Papernomics. Sciences as Games and Means of Censorship / Papernomics. Ciencias y juegos como medios de censura

Las revistas son básicamente el único canal a través del cual los científicos pueden dar a conocer el resultado de su investigación a sus colegas. Las revistas científicas seleccionan la información que publican y garantizan su calidad por medio de un procedimiento de censura por pares de doble ciego. Si, por un lado, este procedimiento parece lógico como método para incluir un estudio en un campo científico consolidado, también es verdad que puede funcionar como mecanismo de censura. La idea de que los trabajos no incluidos en una publicación estándar carecen a priori de prácticamente ningún valor es la base de la carrera académica. Partiendo de este principio se ha construido entre los investigadores un sistema jerárquico de clasificación. La base de este currículum científico es la métrica de la vanidad.Palabras claveRevistas científicas, currículum, censura. AbstractThe journals are basically the only channel through the scientists can make the result of their research known to their colleagues. Scientific journals select the information they publish and guarantee its quality by means of a double blind procedure of censorship by peers. If on the one hand this procedure seems logical as a method for including a study within a consolidated scientific field, it is also true that it can function as a mechanism for censorship. The idea that the works not included in a standard publication lack a priori of practically any value is the basis of the career of academic scholars. Starting with this principle, a hierarchical system of scientific ranking has been built among researchers. The basis of his scientific curriculum is the metric of vanity.Key WordsScientific journals, curriculum, censorship

"Flatus vocis". Genealogía de una palabra sin sentido: patrimonio

En este trabajo se analiza la génesis de la palabra “patrimonio”, tal y como se utiliza actualmente en el Mundo Occidental. Se concluye que puede haber dos modelos de “cultura” (término que cae en desuso, al ser sustituido por la palabra “patrimonio”), aquél en que ésta se compone de una serie de obras de diferentes tipos que cada sociedad integra en su sistema de valores morales y políticos. Y, en segundo lugar, otro modelo de cultura en el que esas obras quedan descontextualizadas y pasan a ser exportables e incluso adquiribles comercialmente. Éste sería el modelo actual, en el que la palabra “patrimonio” sustituye al antiguo término “cultura” y en el que ese término pasa a designar un supuesto conjunto de bienes destinados al consumo turístico.In this work an analysis is made of the word “heritage”, as it is now used in the West World. The conclusion is that there are possibly two models of “culture” (term fallen into disuse being replaced by the word “heritage”), one in which this is composed of a series of works of different kind that each society incorporates into its system of moral and political values. And secondly, another model of culture in which those works are descontextualized and become exportable and even commercially acquirable. This would be the present model, where the word “heritage” replaces the old term “culture” and where that term stands for a supposed set of goods intended for the tourist use

Protection of traditional knowledge from an economics perspective

El artículo se centra en la propuesta de protección de los conocimientos tradicionales (CCTT) plasmada en los documentos elaborados por la secretaría del Comité Intergubernamental sobre Propiedad Intelectual y Recursos Genéticos, Conocimientos Tradicionales y Folclore, de la Organización Mundial de la Propiedad Intelectual. En un primer momento, se destacan los rasgos de esa propuesta de protección que pueden resultar más determinantes desde el punto de vista económico. En segundo lugar, se analiza cómo pueden desarrollarse los distintos tipos de intercambios bajo esa protección. Respecto de los intercambios en los que la transferencia de conocimientos desempeña un papel destacado, el artículo subraya los problemas de asimetrías informativas que pueden operar en contra de los intereses de las comunidades. De donde se desprende que puede ser muy conveniente por lo general que las comunidades cuenten con algún apoyo externo, preferentemente público. Respecto de los intercambios de productos derivados de los CCTT se argumenta que otras medidas de desarrollo más directas que la protección pueden ser más efectivas. Y se subraya la ayuda que los signos distintivos como las marcas colectivas, las denominaciones de origen protegidas y las indicaciones geográficas protegidas pueden prestar. En una sección posterior, se compara, contraponiéndolas, la orientación y justificación de la protección propuesta en la documentación mencionada con la visión que la Economía del Bienestar ofrece de la propiedad intelectual e industrial. El artículo finaliza sugiriendo que, no obstante lo anterior, el proceso de internacionalización del sistema de la propiedad intelectual e industrial puede justificar, por razones de reciprocidad, medidas o sistemas de protección de los CCTTThis article focuses on the proposal of the protection of traditional knowledge expressed in documents prepared by the Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore, of the World Intellectual Property Organisation. Firstly, the characteristics of this protection proposal that could result in more determining factors from an economics point of view are highlighted. Secondly, an analysis is made of how the different types of exchanges covered by this protection may be developed. As regards the exchanges in which the transfer of knowledge plays an important role, the article underlines the problems of informational asymmetry that can work against the interests of the community. From where it emerges that it may be generally more advisable that the communities have some external, preferably public, support. As regards exchanges of products arising from traditional knowledge, it is argued that the protection may be more effective by other more direct means. The help of distinctive signs, such as collective marks, is underlined, as well as protected denominations of origin, and protected geographic indications that may be used. In a later section, a comparison is made by contrasting the orientation and justification of the protection proposal in the previously mentioned documents with the justifi cation that Welfare Economics offers to intellectual and industrial property. The article ends by suggesting that, notwithstanding the aforementioned, the internationalisation process of the intellectual and industrial property may justify, for reasons of reciprocity, measures or protection of traditional knowledgeEste trabajo ha sido realizado en el marco del proyecto FONCICYT 95255, titulado ‘Conservación, desarrollo, aprovechamiento social y protección de los conocimientos y recursos tradicionales en Méxic

Narrar, explicar, pensar

En este trabajo se exponen los rasgos básicos de las teorías cognitivas y\ud narrativas de la Historia y se propone una nueva fonna de abordar la teoría de la misma,\ud a la que se denomina como "pensar la Historia".In this paper are shown the basic features of the narratives and cognitives theories of History and is proposed a new approach to the historical theory, which we\ud call "thinking History"