IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sochwe/v62y2024i3d10.1007_s00355-023-01499-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Quintilian School in the history of Social Choice: an early tentative step from plurality rule to pairwise comparisons

Author

Listed:
  • Jorge Urdánoz

    (Universidad Pública de Navarra)

  • Josep M. Colomer

    (Georgetown University)

Abstract

We present two texts from Roman Empire times that add two early appearances to the stream of the history of Social Choice Theory. One is from the School of Rhetoric of Quintilian (35–96), a contemporary of Pliny the Younger, who developed an early criticism of Plurality rule and, in search of a better method, sketched a choice by pairwise comparisons. The other is from Aulus Gellius (160–180), who used the term “aporia” applied to a voting problem while commenting on a voting by Plurality that yielded counterintuitive or seemingly illogical results. These early analyses and critiques of Plurality rule reveal the flaws of a system that, despite its intuitive or spontaneous appeal, has evident failures that have triggered theoretical reflection from remote times. The two texts also show how paradoxical and problematic situations serve as powerful incentives for reflection and advancement of knowledge and can trigger attempts to address and refine voting and election methods to find more robust and fair alternatives.

Suggested Citation

  • Jorge Urdánoz & Josep M. Colomer, 2024. "The Quintilian School in the history of Social Choice: an early tentative step from plurality rule to pairwise comparisons," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 62(3), pages 505-517, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:62:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s00355-023-01499-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s00355-023-01499-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00355-023-01499-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00355-023-01499-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eerik Lagerspetz, 1986. "Pufendorf on collective decisions," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 179-182, January.
    2. Wulf Gaertner, 2005. "De jure naturae et gentium: Samuel von Pufendorf's contribution to social choice theory and economics," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 25(2), pages 231-241, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Salvador Barberà & Dolors Berga & Bernardo Moreno, 2020. "Arrow on domain conditions: a fruitful road to travel," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(2), pages 237-258, March.
    2. Wulf Gaertner, 2005. "De jure naturae et gentium: Samuel von Pufendorf's contribution to social choice theory and economics," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 25(2), pages 231-241, December.
    3. Iain McLean, 2015. "The strange history of social choice," Chapters, in: Jac C. Heckelman & Nicholas R. Miller (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Voting, chapter 2, pages 15-34, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Eerik Lagerspetz, 2014. "Albert Heckscher on collective decision-making," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 159(3), pages 327-339, June.
    5. Eerik Lagerspetz, 2016. "Plurality, approval, or Borda? A nineteenth century dispute on voting rules," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 265-277, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:62:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s00355-023-01499-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.