Glazer Rubinstein Debates And Decision
Glazer Rubinstein Debates And Decision. A number of experts receive noisy signals regarding a desirable public decision. On a rationale of argumentation rules* jacob glazer1 and ariel rubinstein2 1 the faculty of management, tel aviv university 2 the school of.
The public target is to make the best possible decision on the basis of all the information held. By anton benz, gerhard jaeger, and robert van rooij. Glazer, j., & rubinstein, a.
Special Lecture Held At The Université De Montréal On November 17, 2000.
Author links open overlay panel jacob glazer a ariel rubinstein b c 1. Jacob glazer and ariel rubinstein. On a rationale of argumentation rules.
On A Rationale Of Argumentation Rules.
Debates and decisions, on a rationale of argumentation rules. By jacob glazer and ariel rubinstein. During the debate, the debaters raise arguments and, based on these arguments, the listener reaches a conclusion.
Glazer, (Tel Aviv University), “Debates And Decisions:
Rubinstein (2000) and glazer & rubinstein (2001, 2004 tried to reconcile the two, the starting point being the logic of language use in a debate. On a rationale of argumentation rules. There is no normative consideration anymore:
On A Rationale Of Argumentation Rules @Article{Glazer2001Debatesad, Title={Debates And Decisions:
A debate is viewed as a decision procedure consisting of two stages: 37 full pdfs related to this paper. A game theoretic approach to the pragmatics of debates:
No Decision Is Correct Or Not.
Who hold contradicting positions regarding the right decision. Ariel rubinstein (princeton university and tel aviv university) and j. This paper was presented at a c.r.d.e.
Post a Comment for "Glazer Rubinstein Debates And Decision"