COWLES FOUNDATION For Research in Economies at Yale University ‘The Cowles Foundation for Research in Economies at Yale University, ‘established ar an activity of the Department of Enomics in 1955, has ‘sits purpose the conduct and encouragement of research in economics ‘and related social eciences with particular emphasis on the develop- ‘mentand application of logical, matheratical, and statistical methods ‘otanalysin The profeesional research staff have, a8 a rule, © depart- ‘mental appointment and some teaching responsibility "The Cowles Foundation continues the work of the Cowles Commis- sion fr Research in Eeonotes founded in 1992 by Alfred Cowles at (Colorado Springs, Colorado. The Commission moved to Chicago in 1999 and was alited withthe University of Chicago until 1985.In 1955 the profesional research staf of the Comminaion acepted ap- ointments a Yale and, slong with other members ofthe Yale Dopart- ‘ment of Economics, formed the research staff ofthe newly established (Cowles Foundation ‘A ist of Cowles Foundation Monographs appears atthe endof this volume 497% ol -33 SECOND EDITION Social Choice and Individual Values Kenneth J. Arrow ‘New Haven and London, Yale University PressConright, 181 ©1863 by Cones Fondation for ‘Reatarchin Eonomicat Yale Unversity Originally published by Jahn Wiley & Sone, Aleghte reserved Thiook may not be epredaced,in whale rin prt many orn (teyond hat copying permite by Sections 107 and 108 the US. Copyright Law and exept by ‘reviewers oth pai pres withowt writen ermiaen er the pbtisere Internationa standard book number ‘Sis-0°300-U1364- (paper ‘6300-01364 pape) Printed inthe United Sate Ameren by ‘Courier Companies, Ine To Selma, my wifeCnarres 1 INTRODUCTION 1. Tux Tres or Secu. Caorce aa capitalist dmoemay there are eesentilly two methods hy which social choices can be made: voting, typically used to male “polite” ‘econ, and the market mechanion,typialy vod tomake “economic” ‘decision. Inthe emerging democracies with mixed economic systems, ‘Great Brian, Fence, and Seandinavis, he same two moda of making ‘cca choles prevall bough more ope given othe metod of voting od decisions based direty o indretiy omit and este the rule of the prise mechani. Eaewhere in tbe world, and eve in amaler ‘sil uats within th democracies soil deesions ar metines made ‘by single ndividuala or small groups and sometines (moe and mare ‘ately in this odor werk) by a widely encompassing otf tredltionl ‘lifer mang i nol ls in ay en ane, ef reo "Tas at wo meh fang nce te aa et ee pp eopmen cating niet a doom Tiere eae ‘alsa rem of anime detonate inet oral danme tans he anes ered nus yim ‘tepetsaorip‘Te goede errata cntens te ad 22 ‘Sacer tv tw crib ‘ke pean tine mht sea Bape at tn fa narrate ‘mgt tt slang trough se Smeal peer opel, fos da” "Orit cx hype tha intarptation psf he hana of te pops uty cd ot tsa nrg anon denne ooo te, 1 ante mene ef oni aes he rota iene ceiLeMgh elec ind ttre ie 1 Pern, gos ‘te Peo Capon, Loon 1 Bary, 184 pp. 00. Be ore ty, (Shite cee thera dca ote ered eat te nee ps ote hands seiner sal upsell” "Phe eatin of methods of alc nba apc to Peer aight deine ano cam aut Snd wns ae ta 1S ‘sideman neh re agro gad ie are Kaigh, ‘Shen Nae Sad Won Beaecvn”t Prise Br, New Yor rial Bc, Yer we tsa rrrnonvcron fem. ‘The lst two methods of sosal cho, detatanthip and convent ‘ven thelr formal strctirea certain detent sbent fre ving ofthe market machasiom. In Heal dletatonip there but one wil Involved in choy, in am deal society ruled by coaveation there is but the divine will or perhaps, by assumption, a common wil of all lad idl concerning soil decons, 0 fn eicher ens no colt off vidual wisi Involved* ‘The meds of voting and the market, 0 the other hand, are methods of amalgamating the tastes of many ind vidal a the making of toca eeiees ‘The method of ditatortip ‘td convention ae of cane, ration i te sens hat ayadvedual ‘am be rational in his choes Can auch cooiteney be aiebuted to clletive modes of hole, wher the wil of many people are invabed? tahould be exphasiaed here that the present stayin coaceraed only withthe fomnal aspects ofthe above quustion. ‘Thats we sak Wii alt the thre alterontves wll be avaliable. In analogy with tho wtal burt of the community would mean thet the community ordoe the {hee alternatives scoring to ite collective pefrenen one fr all, ‘nd then choososin any given case that alleraative among thowe scaly ‘valable which stands highest on this Uo. A natural way of ariving ‘8 the cullective preference sale would be to aay that oe allaaative {in pared to another if majority ofthe community prefer the St 1 ene, of ea, tat th ea, Ihe th al nan mam ‘Seas ae dein when font tn rage of treats nd tht bo ‘meth ane eon is bead nae ange chat ‘The ey lo mabe sence dean oe ot appa nap ‘penalty han we pmo sl Scie mas lreig my nal (Geo te matte pete ecg eesti le {rat bo reed ta al fin oe sa nepal toe Wher {St pein nly al ome ob sou Te foal wes ot ‘Sette ued btn he pels pein ty nora {Sean sno fos integned tly sere mast rth ‘Sms of eu mene sacl or resorption pt lat ‘nt fr tapaton aan xe. 11 ‘mae evra oF soot notes a ltaroatve to the sooad, ie, would choose the frst ovr the szond ithe were the only two allaratives. Let A, B, aod C be the three ‘slteratives and 1, 2, 3 the thee individual, Suppose individual 1 before to Band B to C (and therfore A to C), individual 2 prefers Bto Cand Co A (and therfore B to), and indvidval 3 prefers € t9A and A t B (aad therefore C to B)- ‘Thea e ojonity prefer ‘A to B, and a majority prefer Bo C. We may therefore any that the ‘Sommutity prefers A to-B and B to C. Ifthe community ls vo be ‘eaatded as behaving retinal, we are forced to say that Ale prefered oC. Bet ifort a majority of the cxamunity prefer C to 4. So the ‘ethod jut outlined for pasiag fom individual to collctivetasten fi to satiny the condition of analy, as we ordinarily wodertand it. Ca we Gnd other methods of weregatingindivden! tastes which ‘nplyrtonal behavior onthe part of te community and which will ‘mista of some sort (to be dacued at greater logth below), then {Ge problem of achieving a osal maximom derived from indvidul ‘estes fs peciely the problem which han beea antral to the Bed of ‘welfare etaomien ‘Thee no seed review the history ofthis suet ‘Bdetail* There has bean controversy as to whether or nt the eeone- my be sed th he mat of dco hd shoe eel ht EAS et tee a a teat my oe ‘Suerbd is tn trea be wes par fom ste dopeon of oe ropa ‘Str mont Cone for nr a test dunt tg sere Sis ete edt ab SsUG Ed haem rm and Poti By ay Ve Sa fi pe Tory Tae nd SE en nny ee a ee Sizes inlet ett Halon." ia Ped on Room om oy ord haces wtb ocd fo. A. Samay Packs of Eenomie Asin, Cig, achat Horr nvr Pre 47, Cater Vl seid pmo ar era pene et Een ety Fen "ot eFC Aan int devclpenta ni be oud twa “Seat exe by 1X Boyan Sur of Coumnprry Eom Bue, Paci ‘The neson Coy Toth Chper Nil In aes to te thew Satan (2 peat ate te Bl wl fan ie. Langy to PeunatoanlWetare Ecsenien” Bomemarmy Vl 0 lp-Ocb 1, py 6-28; ond. oe, Sin eT o War Sorta Nor Vr Chi ney ‘ren 0, Chaptede mg ong ud Mo! ++ - sonmmp y, Leas Auto eet‘ ‘it np ato ep ytDr. Howard Bowen hus considered voting asthe demand for colestive com is tretient be rege. 2. Sows Lavramons oF max Anatase Teas been sated above that dhe prose study coatne isl to the formal aspects of ealective social choi ‘The aspects not disaswd ‘may be conveniently deserted as the game supe, expecially ace that term has sogurd a double meaning. "inthe frm pase fo easeeects i ana. tana agen tp ‘seme er enn ance nga one ta abst et oe orca eee a rm warms nr eons eo, Sem see we sawed pnt oud conan sane NB PE fed nen tan Forage ima one‘hercoreanume throughout ths book tha the behavior lin making choices desedbabo by means of pefreice Seine, either ndivialoriaterpesocal.»_mevmesrneame ne sone | ‘irments. Inger en alternative ia vector; however, the theory of clstion, the alteratives ae candlates, ‘Tues alemaves me ‘mutialy exclusive; they are denoted by the small lees ss (On any given ceaton, the choot his svalabl to him 8 cabs Sof ll ponsblealtematives and eis requir to chocee ove out af tis ‘nt The et Sins generzatin of the wellknown opportunity curve, thus, i the theory of consumer's chee under perfect compediion woul be th budget plane. Tt i asumed further thatthe cole fe rade in this way: Belore knowing the st, the chose consdes in {um al posible pairs af alternatives, sy and y, and foreach such pit ‘be mks one aod oly one of three deisions: is preferred fo, indiferent toy, or vis prefered to. The decison nae fer diferent airs ae asin fo be consent with eachother, 9, for example i ‘is preferred toy andy tos, then © prefered to ersdelatye 2 indereat toy andy tos, then zisindiferent to. ‘Having ths cceces of all posible aleratives, the chooser ia ow confronted witha gee Licalar opportunity set 8. It there i one alternative in 9 which prlrred to all thers in S, the chooser sects tat one alomatve, Suppee, however, there isa subset of alteratives in 8 such thatthe sernatves inthe subset are cach preferred to every alternative sot the aueet wile the alternatives fo the mist ar indent to ace oer. “Ths case would bo on in whlch the highest inference case {hat has point in cock with a gvenopportanity curv ha tat {oro points in common within this cay, the beat ting to gs thatthe chice made in isthe wholeaubeet; the fret case Gost ‘nein which the abet in question, the chee, costann angle cman Siac we have not rsreted the type oft allowed a thin pe ily present there may be no aternative in S which spree x indferent o al other. ‘Tati for every alleastve ia & there ‘nother which a prefered toi. Forename tuppse that an fenced ‘refers more money toes and that the alternatives iS inclode ove fntagral number of dolar. “Or, we wish to sequire tat fa res ‘eome bounded, consider the sequence of alterstives 3, 34,34," 1 ~ (W/m), +» dala ‘Thee cannot Yaly be sid to 0628) oul hoot a this as. However, this mathematica poit wil wot ply coy ‘ar inthe present wor Preference and indiferene are rations batweenaltematives. Tne ead of working with to relations it wl be why more conveieat | toe single relatos, “prefemed or indifeent.""The satemant “ig prefered of indifeen to y” will be symbolised by = By. The ties A, by ial, il be the name ofthe relation ad wl and fort koa "edge of all pairs such that 9" ‘Fom oor provius docuaion, eo voces 8 ec A] worse ron meen ht or any pf armas nd itr pera pay toy or the two are indiferent. ‘That, we have assemed 11g bee aleratives ae comparable? But thi asumptin may Shennymicalys ae oso Parl sey, ers Ry oY Aan ie sini i aio ea, Note lana Ti reamed td when + = au wel an when = soma ten ay eget isiaplee sz Nota th ‘a “ Sst ds nt cca te ty of bth # Ry to y= ‘That word merely ater tht at lest oe ofthe to events st. oecur, ve pe the preferences be- property mentioned above of ening in he pe tou dep of serine mayb ued ote pec ot {Soest apne orient oy dy pred oid (oe thea z mun be cer pred rindi tos In eel ‘Axiou I: For all, yond 2,2 Ry andy Bs imply = R. pausing etna tbx tnt’ Aron il oi tslons Tes rode mak ine tein ny om srdering Tt is ‘lear that « relation having these two properties See Te ete ae ne Sheers frees cars naan oa Se en ee ead i, ee a ea knoe leat vneeng roy oto ete Sampo ere ees SSeS eee ease ania sanereancie Roepe easter Seer ‘Top pint oe om inn du ve Gp" Ama de PU a ee cai ail it Axiom T bd for = #9 iheenswa tae : Reet ceri rerracers a rete ey Ou Cay, Pr, Hp) {Bre Re ey amr mandewetey e n wo “mnie ner ses" Tat ad pvcgn eden ton" red te sng rns “eyes ne meet ee eee on wb rela et ange Xitel fg eng on lc ea dl Se saa Sirens‘enpuapar oo, sy 0 ypu ped oes fo YeNOwTE 2 | woridusop syydnoo © 9 pom oye oe ¥ yo woReueP mete Jou ouy, su oon are songs yo sooo ony Ape yond oA) ST | oaoigand pe PY 0) 990 HOU8 ses areas oF resrenetce ax cnotce —enar. it | nronniron ow MAMONALETY Ao emote » ssc. 4) i ‘ Towra uit otic ee seas th side of consumption, ofthe versace betnen Caer eerantag hovers, Vo eh Anus 1a pp Fa Oe is odin ope by Fins Ps naa le Se sees ose “the nant Se ie cee eas ces ase > for aerating ‘etl tae (one daring for ech inal) sate crerpending oie ring of rns scl ste, ‘As a mater of notation, we will Wt be the soil erdeing core ponding to the se of inva orderings yy Ry the corepond- ‘Bev bnng that etalshed by given social wellare fenton; if pres ‘riscond are added vo thst for theindvidal ordering, primes ot ‘ronda il be aed tote ymbol forthe corresponding soll ordering. “Ther le some diference between the concep of socal mallre fan tion usd here and tht employed by Bergson, ‘The individual orderings trick enters arguments ino the socal wellar fonction as deed here Teter tothe valves of inividuals rather han to tet tates. Bergson ‘uppoees individ values tobe such aso yield oc vale judgment lending to prtclar ule Tor determining the allocation of preductive ‘esourer and the dstibution of lire and fal product In acardance ‘ith indivdoal tat Tn eft the social wll neon deserved Tere is method of choosing which soll welae function ofthe Berson ‘ype il be applicable, though, of cou, I donot exclude the po [ity Wat the toc shoes actaaliyarcved at wil ot be conan ‘withthe partial vale jodgmeats formulated by Bergson. Buti te formal spect the diference between the wo defltions of oil welfare fntin i nt to important. In Bergin’ treatment, the tastes of Individuals (cach for he own consumption) are roprenated by wilt fencing ia, eaenilly by ordering relations; beac the Bergson soil ‘elle funtion i also a ral for aasiging to cach st of laddaam ‘mE soctat wateans FONCTION lower x cndriag seoslordeig of soil salen Parthermore as aay indcatd, shar tne can be Gown beteen aes tod Vl “A owe pe oscil wey fneion oul be one cans tte ies ring erry wt niu og fa Sia ‘at of coun, cl choles ure completly input of adel ‘tt, and we ae bck in he Patan 1 we do ot wih to require say pro knowledge ofthe tates of ints Wr cng ox el wate fantom tht nt wil bare fo for every legally poles of inal deings, Such asl walle anctin would beunivena isthe oy ac uke pay omy. Ts al et ‘mpi a ‘tis aod fos attenday descendent ‘welfare economics, 2 "However we aed not ak cures if ch sive] la wlare funetion cone dtoe. Let andi vot ndveatendaing cae ics beat for ws he nial wel ction dene score ing ccal creo, Le, a tetonmlsying Aston T and My oot ‘al weil ele fcton molt cs for which evey et ot ‘tal ngs na ain” However, we ay fod ssa ot pre round ht cna pn of ial nein net et te tdtistie. For eampin has hogy bees elo fap it ele etoomice tat cash india alo deren wo ene {sty eceorig to his cosunpton ander hem. Its be the st 1 sold ely rou that out scl wee fiction be Seda fo ‘Bes st avi oneingy wich a fete ected ea ‘eh hal be amiable ‘We wil bower, apps that ou pri nowlege about the cocurac onda rigs nope xe tas he {55 leat thro aong all the alrantires under coders fy ‘hich te ordering hy any sven advan i completly anenora ie ‘Grane. Tha every lxcaly pole at of indie rdeags cera tt Boles leant san te cand frm som ot ‘ie st of nd renga l'art Mor foal, Common 1: Among al the aliration Bare ie 0 at 8 of three ert tre tf ial ig Tyo Pe ot ‘arnatvs in 5; ere ts on admis eof Indl eartoe, Buys Ru of all he lleraies such thal, foreach individual Rey nd ony 2 Toy forza yn 5. Condition 1, it shuld be emphasized, ex restretion on the fora of the social welfare function snc, by denon of an adobe nt of exc, 9] rosrrve asoctarion oF foc AND IEDIMIDEAL VALOES individual orderings, we are requicng that for some sufcently wide range of sts of individual orderings, the social welfare function give isto w tus sei ordain. "We also wish to limpone several ober apparetly reasonable cond tions onthe social welfare function. 2, Poarera Associ oF Soctat Axo Txorvipeat VALS fine wear tyig to deere sol lar and not soe eto * a i ht oa le i a ‘oil ordering ponds pal to alterations In alae, Sinem mene ne sets sae Gr ren sil be edaring of every Inia wont any oer ‘Senge i thes oretagn we pes att Sooo a at Gee not {atthe soil erring “Thine cn be Mfomnlatad a flow: Sapp, in he nia pon hat ndividal vale re ie by wae fave erro Fao Band apps tat the corepeding srl erdeg Ba twih hes Py, whe cand yar ve Gita aranie oP te] Pees ration comsapeding to, tay dened ln toma oa! eotaoe wit Dein Spon vans mbnquenty change ‘cha way that foreach nv te oly change nats rashes iTany, tats higher ate sol as bor we Inve rdeigs (oe expan he ewe av) ‘hd the social dering cormeponing to tem I, hen we woul = tiniest nts P'y where Pee rca ranion coment dng to This marl rogurement neo lndvioa ranks = Tees hn he rey i tyre rake = he we ‘Sos erany expe that “We have sl to expres formally the condition tat = be not ower sa ech individu sale wal ober comparisons remain changed ‘Tolan pao he ncn canbe eprened by yng tat sng tit ofetarativsocther ef which i he rasion wil obuaa {or thoe piso which the elton Rola and oul such oem, foralle’ re xandy 2 Ry Hand ony 2 Ry The condos {Eats be not wero the wile han 3 soni Ry sel mene refered on tho ol (Ff) sal and ale thet =f prefered or ndiferent {oranyaltemative to whieh i was formerly indifernt. The two conde Los ofthe lat weatece taken together, re equivalent othe following to conditions: (1) 2 ls prefered on the ew exalo to any alternative {0 which it was formerly preferred; @) = is prefered or iifrent on‘Saz tad octyl Caveat be esse when ind vidal wie a ny ot el ing oy hn problem arts In ranking teams in contest which ie enen- nj egy foot race ia which there ar everal Tuners to rank the insttions osvoting, 1S the st 9] consiatng ofthe tro alteroatves = andy, ‘Gandion 3 alle the the chee between + and yi determined elely bythe preferences ofthe members ofthe community as between andy ‘That ui we know which mambere ofthe comsmuaity prefer = © ¥, trhich tre indilferent, and which prefer y to, thn we know what ‘hoje the community maken Keowing the socal cheese made in pa ‘re compares a tara determine the entire oil oreriag and Were {th tho vocal coca funtion C(S) for all poate envionment, ‘Condition 3 guarantees that voting fo a certain alteratve hat the ‘Sra eet of making surer that that alternative wll be adopted "Condition 1 sys in fect, tht a the environment varies and indi- ‘vidual orderings remain Sed, the diferent choles made shall bear & ‘Srlan typeof easitent relation to each other. Conditions 2 and 3, ‘0 the other hand, cuppoee a fied environment and say that for extn patealar pen of variation in Individual value, the various choices ‘aud ave a certain type of onsen. 4. Tan Comomnow oy Crm Sovenriowrr ‘We certainty wish to aarums thatthe fndivdual In ou society are {oe to chose, by varying tise value, among the alloantives valle, ‘That in we do nt wich our socal walle function to be suchas to Drovet by it vary deiiton, frm expresng« preferece fr some tien alterative over another Daaromow §: A social wore function wl be id tobe inponed fr toma pair of sine aration» andy, 2 By for any oe of ind dal evderings By By hr ish ail erring crrerponding (Ryo Be 1s ther word, when th soil welfare function I impose, there {atoms puro alteraatves = andy rch tnt the community ean never ‘expren 8 pefernee for over 2 no matier what the tate of al indi ‘duals ae, even i all ndviduas prefer y to =; eome preferences are taboo. (Note that, by Deiitlon 1, aserting that» ey holds fr all feta individual ordering Sa equvaent to asserting tht y P= never ‘ode. It in arguable whether or not Detnition 5 catches the cence of {Be nti iden of conventional cols, Ta the tus cvs of etry sxc.) "THR coNoimon oF rns sovemoNrr = restints on social choice, pmumably the rettints are not et as ech but realy ave prt of Ue tsts of the individual. The problas fre Involve peyeologial sets can we ape, in the given ste [on, of trv dsr ofthe invicul members ofthe orety which are {i eonfit with the custom ofthe group the anower to the last question io ye, then Definition 8 is indent ‘covet formation ofthe concept of convenionaity. But we need Stor gve a dante anower, nd the la especialy fortunate sine an ‘Erominaton ofthe question would tke us very far afeld indeed For ‘erly we watt inspone oo aol wallare funtion the condition that it sot be lmpeoed inthe sense of Deion 5; we extanly wish ‘Athan tobe poet unasimouly deste by the group. If Defi {Sond ionck a mdel of cstmary choice, tis at east a model of external eatrl suchas aban in a olony ran ocupld country. Ccomosriow 4: The soil were function nt tb impor. \ Condition 4s stronger than ned befor the present argument. Some ecjone aa between pvea pas of aleratives may be asumed tobe | Staposed, All hati equrc really is that there be a aot 3 of thee [ternative ouch that hecho between any pale ont constrained in ‘vance by the toca welarefuneton, ‘Tha sot S must also have the ‘proper fndated in Condit 1 the anower to the quaston asked eae is that theres no wee in speaking ofa conflict of wis between the idvidual and the sacred ‘ade then we have «station in which iis known in advance thatthe {Savidual orderinge of socal alternatives conform to certain etic tion ie thatceraln ofthe coins ade by idviduals re praseigned. Tinta ha, we might dere Wt tae socal walle function be defined ty fw sta of indi orcernescomoatible withthe knowa sodo- ‘hil noms of the comms ti requirement ay invlvea weaken {ng of Conlon 1. Thin polt wil be dacussed at greater length in (Chaps Vit. Te should als be noted thet Condition 4 excludes the Platonic ease ivcused in Section | ofthis chapter. Te expremes uly the idea that ‘ll social choiom ar determi! by individual desires. Tn conjunction ‘with Condition 2 (which nares that the determination i in the dire ton of agresing ith nvidal desires), Condition 4 express th same iden os Benpon's Fundamental Value Propesions of Tadvidel Pret- freee, which sate that botween tno alternatives between which all facials but one are indent, the community wil prefer one over {he oer or be indiferent betwen the two eroding asthe coe inde |vidual prefers oo over the othar ori indiforont between the two. Conditona 2 and 4 togtbercorespond to the usual conept of cou- ssner oovercigty; save we are ove sfering to valuca rather thas ‘Se remit mr fen wg the ef cin 5. Tue Conomor oF Noxorcratonsmr ‘A second form of sola choice not of a coletve character isthe cles by dielatorship In is pure frm, it means tha eal choles ‘re tobe band aly on the prefrenom of ope man. ‘That i, when ter the diatator prefers Uo 9,20 does solely. Ifthe dtaar bs Slifeceat between x ad y,pruzubly bo wil thea leave the choice up to some or ll of the otber members of sort. Dernrron 6: A sci welfare fundion i said tobe dctatoial fre exe om india { nuh tha fora = andy, = Py imple =P y ro urls ofthe odering Ry > Ru ofl individual cher han i where ‘Pia the soil prefrmes relation crrerponding 1 By °°, By. ‘Since we are interested in tho constvetion of collective methods of social choc, we wah Uo exclude lctatoral ada welfare fonctions. Conon: Thal lr man a ari dictatorship). om et hn! tin i tn atte eee a ec an Siete inn! aay aioe Renee same ita ei 4S ea hie iritey tutine eis cata ar bas SNe ciara ee ae SOM esc erect ‘into Spar msi rie TOSS Cane cay Treeat apar es eu ee Thro ey mm i en Sn as scien see St Reece et SRE e Ss ee Seung ov of nae it ed tr wo a a dese ptt et Sm ir te wo. ‘res emouamion oF ori a ‘nls judgment and could be elle Sato question; taken together they ‘rps the doctrines of cine’ sovereignty and rationality ia a very ‘loca fora, wth the Guzene being allowed to have wide range of ‘ise The guetion mised i that of eonarustig a eoial ordering of “Mhooccveieslteratve ssi tates from any given sto ndvidual ‘rdrings of thse socal natn the method of eoosuction being in ‘leorance with the vale jcgmentsof eae soverignty and raion {Sig as expensed in Condon 1-6 6. Tus Semaumion or Uruiss tmay be instructive to consde that proposed socal wellre function hich hun the longs Motor, dhe Bentham Edgeworth sum of ind ‘idol wtttes. Ae Wt stand; this form seems to be excluded by the {tie nature ofthe present approeh, sinc, in Chapter IJ, Section 1, sre egred to reo the ie of arnault, and especially of inter ly comparable ulity. However, presumably the sum of wt [clcould be yelormulated ine way which depends oly onthe indvidal frderings and not on the wtlayfadeatrs. This snems to be implied fy Bern's discon of thie socal welfare funtion; "though he pre- fois enuber of cogent arguments galt the umf ais form, ‘Be doa not find that coatradet the Fundamental Value Propeions| ‘St Lndvida! Preference (ae Sesion ¢ above), whieh he would have to 1 he did not consider that form to bo determined by the Individual ‘orderings. The oly way that Toan so of making the sum of uit ‘Sepa ely on th indierece lo le the flowing: Sine to each id ‘ial ordetog ther coresponda an infinite uber ef wt indicators, (iv up an atbirary role which asigna to each inference map one of Tt wlity indicators; then the sum ofthe partir wtity indent howe by the rul is fonction ofthe individual orderings and can be ‘Gd fo eablsh «vocal ordering. “Obvicly, thi formation ofthe sum of wes wil ad to diferent dle ins given sision with aifrent chaz of the rule. For fy rl, Condition Ils ated. However, Conditions 2 and 8 een- Tally preeibe tha, fora given environment, the choice made ball ay lau pericls way wth crtain varias ln the orderings of indi+ “ideals ‘This blag vy ia clear tht for he sue of wits to atily ‘Conditions 2 and 3 it would be toceary forthe rule tobe stengetly Toate in fac, the general Uscorem, otblched in Chaptar Var ‘rts thatthe oaly rue which woul ake Uo sum of wits any ‘Conditions 2 and 3, ay, lead i to vst ether Coniton 4 or Condi Bergen "A Raa = on oy 9. 504 S382 ‘rap socan wevrane roverion (our. tos 6. Indeed, scoring to Thoorem 3 la Chapter VI Section 3, the tame would be te evea fit were assumed thatthe wily ofeach ad. ‘idl dependod ecely on hie own conrampton. T have not bom ble To contract» ape poate hl fact for the eum of ules which ect diferent frm the prot ofthe geerl theorem. Temsay be of intrest, however, to consider particlar Fue for asign- Ing utlty indicators to fodvidual oreringa” Amare thatthe ind ‘val ordering for probly ltstbutions over alteatives obey the ‘ions of von Neuann and Morgenster;* then there is «method of ‘Sigal ules tothe alternatives, unique up toa incr transforma tion which bar the property that the probably diibutoae over ‘lteroatives are ordered by the expectod Yaluo of wlty. Assume hat foreach individual thre is alwaye oo alternative whic is preferred or ‘ndifeent to all other eonsivablealteraatives and one to which all ‘ther aerontives se profesor indifret. "The, fr ach ine, ‘he wlity indicator canbe dened uniquly among the previouly de ‘Sd clas, which is unique up to a linear trandformation, by andgxing ‘he wl 1 to the best canola alternative and O to dhe wort come ‘vale allemative ‘This xignment of value is dxgned to make {baivdaa utes interpersonally comparable. "isnot hard tose atthe suggtd asgnment of ulin is x= leemelyunsaiactory. Suppose there are aliogeber thre alternatives bd tre individuals" Lat to of Ue indivdaa ave te ity 1 for ‘traative for 9, and Ofors; ad let the third individual have the [Bly 1 Tory fers and O fore. Acording tothe above eriterion, y Inprtered to. Chatty, xia avery undesirable alteraatve snc eth Individoal regards i an worst. I+ were Boted out of exstencs, it should not make any diference tothe Saal outcome; ye, under the pro- ‘ote rule for smigning ules to allaratve, doing vo would cause ‘he Gt two lavas to ave wtlty 1 for = and fry, while the ‘hind individual has lity 0 for» and 1 fry, 0 thatthe ordering by ‘um of lin would cause = tobe prefered to. “A simple modifcation ofthe above argumest shows tha tho propood le doce not lad toa roofless were fuetlonenaltent ‘with Condition 3. Tnsand of blotting = oat of existence, lt the inde “idl ererings change in such away that the ft two individual find ‘Fadilerent to + and the third now finds + indiferent toy, while the feitve postions of = and y ae unchanged in ll individual orderings ‘Then the assignment of ules to 2 and y becomes the sine ad It Tete waa mgt Aap, siete, apr ox ‘ran eomuarion oF vrnmies = became in the case of biotting out «entry, so that agnin the choice betwee 2 and y is alle, contrary to Condition 3. “The shove result appete to depend oa the particular method of ‘hosing the uit of wty Bu tit not tru ltbough the paradox Jnnot 0 chviou in other cana. ‘The pin iin general that the chee of two parca alternative to produce given wlitin (ay 0 and 1) {San arbitrary ect, and thinasbitrsies fo ulmatelyreectd in the {aus of the fplad soll welfare function to stely ne ofthe cond ons aid down,