On Nov 16, 2009, at 2:15 PM, Andrew Myers wrote: > Jonathan Lundell wrote: >> This is in part Arrow's justification for dealing only with ordinal (vs >> cardinal) preferences in the Possibility Theorem. Add may label it >> preposterous, but it's the widely accepted view. Mine as well. > Arrow's Theorem seems like a red herring in the context of the cardinal vs. > ordinal debate. IIA makes just as much sense when applied to range voting as > it does to ranked voting. Arrow was just making a simplifying assumption and > I don't see that it makes his results lose generality.
I don't have his proof in front of me (I'm on the road), but I'm pretty sure that it assumes ordinal ranking. ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
