Fabrizio Cariani

speaker

176 appearances 1 recordings 1 series first heard Jul 2010 last heard Jul 2010

Fabrizio Cariani’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.

Trend

recordings per month · last 12 months

No recordings in the last 12 months.Older appearances are listed below; set an alert to hear about the next one.

Appearances

newest first · ▶ plays the moment

Elucidations · Episode 13: Fabrizio Cariani discusses judgment aggregation · 9 Jul 2010 podcast

So whether or not they believe that proposition, for example.

So like when a panel of experts decides that a certain area is not at risk of earthquakes or something like that.

But it's one thing to have a group converge on a particular proposition and it's a different thing to have the group converge on a whole set of propositions where some of them may be reasons for others.

And that's a lot more complicated as it turns out.

I think I'm interested in both of those questions and I'm also interested in a few questions that are a bit hybrid.

So there is one sense in which the theory itself, the formal theory, is neutral between a prescriptive and a descriptive interpretation.

Just like for example, principles of logic you may think are neutral between a descriptive and a prescriptive interpretation.

But I think there's gonna be applications of the theory in which the outcome is clearly descriptive.

For example, some applications in artificial intelligence when people ask questions about how we should aggregate multiple databases into some single opinion holder.

But there are also some applications that I consider to have much more normative significance.

So one of the applications that I'm most interested in is

An application to collective testimony.

So the question is how we should react to the testimony of a group of people.

For example, again, of a panel of experts when they give you their opinion on certain subject matter.

And it's clear that that question has, in some sense, a normative significance.

So for example, suppose I consult a geologist from Caltech, a geologist from Stanford, and a geologist from California about the probability of earthquakes.

in California next year or something like that.

But also about a number of other propositions that may be related to that.

So things like what kinds of phenomena were observed out in the oceans in the past five years, let's say.

There is a sense in which what the theory is trying to get at is how I should revise my belief in the face of the testimony of these experts.

Showing 41–60 of 176 · page 3 of 9