Abstract
Human beings are not very good at making decisions or planning. It is argued that a major reason for this lies in the essential logic that underlies decisionmaking discourse. Those with experience of decisionmaking will know that wild speculations and conflicting values confound the process, quite apart from logical confusions or mixing the general with the particular. This paper, the first of two, introduces a simple now-future logic which makes the concept of speculation well-defined. It is shown that speculations infect discourse with uncertainty out of all proportion to their frequency of occurrence. A ‘normative logic’ is introduced which allows arguments to be evaluated in terms of mixtures of good-bad-true-false. Decisions are sets of stated actions or intentions which are consistent with decision constraints as agreed by the decisiontakers. Decisionmaking authority is hierarchical and this is discussed in the context of the related, but distinct, hierarchy of set-theoretic aggregation of the parti...
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
