A proof-theoretical view of collective rationality

The impossibility results in judgement aggregation show a clash between fair aggregation procedures and rational collective outcomes. In this paper, we are interested in analysing the notion of rational outcome by proposing a proof-theoretical under- standing of collective rationality. In particular, we use the analysis of proofs and inferences provided by linear logic in order to define a fine-grained no- tion of group reasoning that allows for studying collective rationality with respect to a number of logics. We analyse the well-known paradoxes in judgement aggregation and we pinpoint the reason- ing steps that trigger the inconsistencies. Moreover, we extend the map of possibility and impossibility results in judgement aggregation by discussing the case of substructural logics. In particular, we show that there exist fragments of linear logic for which general possibility results can be obtained.