{"id":14803,"date":"2018-07-13T08:26:18","date_gmt":"2018-07-13T08:26:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/essays.homeworkacetutors.com\/sens-theorem-overview-and-analysis\/"},"modified":"2018-07-13T08:26:18","modified_gmt":"2018-07-13T08:26:18","slug":"sens-theorem-overview-and-analysis","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/us\/sens-theorem-overview-and-analysis\/","title":{"rendered":"Sen\u2019s Theorem: Overview and Analysis"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Table of Contents (Jump to)<\/h3>\n

1. Introduction<\/a><\/p>\n

2. A Review of Sen\u2019s Theorem<\/a><\/p>\n

3. The Rise of New Interpretation<\/a><\/p>\n

4. Merits of the New Interpretation<\/a><\/p>\n

5. Conclusion<\/a><\/p>\n

References<\/a><\/p>\n

1. <\/a>Introduction<\/h2>\n

The Sen\u2019s theorem has an important impact on the decision and social choice theory. In the Nobel Prize lecture of 1998, Sen said that discovering the societal decision rules will be the main objective of the choice theory. However, Sen found it is difficult to achieve this objective in his paper of \u201cImpossibility of a Paretian Liberal\u201d (Sen, 1970a, b, 1976c). Sen\u2019s theorem states that it is impossible to achieve the minimal aspect of liberalism when it is combined with the Pareto condition. According to the theorem of Sen, it seems that there is a fundamental conflict between the Pareto welfare concepts and the liberalism. After this argument, there is a pooling of studies that focus on the individual rights and there are also studies that find new interpretation for the theorem of Sen.<\/p>\n

According to Saari and his collaborators, the cyclic decision outcomes established by Sen\u2019s theorem describe a transitional, dysfunctional state of society. This essay will mainly explain how this interpretation arises and discuss its merits relative to the original interpretation offered by Sen. The essay will be structured as follow: in the second session, the essay will briefly introduce the Sen\u2019s Theorem regarding to the conflicting results between Pareto Optimal and Liberalism. Examples will also be used to better illustrate the choice decisions. In the third session, the essay will how and why there will be new interpretations of the theorem of Sen. Particularly, the essay will base its argument on the research results of Saari and his collaborators. In the fourth session, the essay will discuss the merits of the new interpretation compared with the interpretation by Sen himself. In the last session, a brief conclusion will be made based on the analysis in the previous session.<\/p>\n

2. <\/a>A Review of Sen\u2019s Theorem<\/h2>\n

The Sen\u2019s impossibility of a paretian libertarian theorem or Sen\u2019s paradox Paratian liberal states that weak Pareto criterion and liberalism may have conflicts on the fundamental level, which indicated that the Pareto criterion is flawed. On one hand, it shows that the Pareto criteria only consider aspects of difference in efficiency among relevant states while ignoring the individual utility conflicts arising because of these states. On the other hand, the theorem also shows the in addition to considering some reasonable internal conditions, one also needs to consider issues such as liberalism for social order decision making. According to Sen, there are some choices that are purely of personal nature, such as the state (x) means everything else in the society as \u03a9, when A is sleeping supine, state (y) means everything else in society as \u03a9, when A is sleeping prostrate. If A has a preference of y than x, while many others in the society prefer the opposite, then it can be considered that social choice between x and y is a purely personal thing, because A is the only a \u2018real \u2018 person that is related to the choice while other people are just nosy person. It can also be considered that one can choose one such a collective choice rule where A\u2019s preference should be accurately reflected by social preferences in this purely \u2018personal nature\u2019 choices (Sen, 1970). Based on this point, Sen emphasizes that people should pay attention to the study of individual rights and other issues affecting the social choice order and decision making. The new welfare economics and welfare economics research before the new welfare economics are consciously or unconsciously avoid these problems.<\/p>\n

Sen (1970) found that the Pareto criterion is incompatible with liberalism. Pareto optimality is used by the economists and other social scientists to measure the efficiency of society, which is also the the most common and widespread, even the only indicator. It refers to such a state that we are good as it gets, no one can make an additional welfare without compromising the welfare of others. And the principles of individual freedom are the relentless pursuit of mankind, both of which are on the intuition that people can fully accept and understand. However, Sen\u2019s theorem shows that these two attractive standards are contradictory and cannot be simultaneously true.<\/p>\n

3. <\/a>The Rise of New Interpretation<\/h2>\n

There are three assumptions that Sen\u2019s theorem is based on and the realistic of these assumptions will be one reason why there will be new interpretations for the Sen\u2019s theorem. First, the essay will briefly introduce the assumptions related to the Sen\u2019s theorem.<\/p>\n