scholarly journals Commitment-based action: Rational choice theory and contrapreferential choice

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 313-322
Author(s):  
Bojana Radovanovic
Keyword(s):  
Rational Choice ◽  
Decision Maker ◽  
Rational Choice Theory ◽  
Choice Theory ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
Personal Wellbeing ◽  
The One

This paper focuses on Sen?s concept of contrapreferential choice. Sen has developed this concept in order to overcome weaknesses of the rational choice theory. According to rational choice theory a decision-maker can be always seen as someone who maximises utility, and each choice he makes as the one that brings to him the highest level of personal wellbeing. Sen argues that in some situations we chose alternatives that bring us lower level of wellbeing than we could achieve if we had chosen some other alternative available to us. This happens when we base our decisions on moral principles, when we act out of duty. Sen calls such action a commitment-based action. When we act out of commitment we actually neglect our preferences and thus we make a contrapreferential choice, as Sen argues. This paper shows that, contrary to Sen, a commitment-based action can be explained within the framework of rational choice theory. However, when each choice we make can be explained within the framework of rational choice theory, when in everything we do maximisation principle can be loaded, then the variety of our motives and traits is lost, and the explanatory power of the rational choice theory is questionable.

Rational Choice Contractualism

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Moehler
Keyword(s):  
Rational Choice ◽  
Rational Choice Theory ◽  
Choice Theory ◽  
Correct Choice ◽  
Original Position ◽  
Decision Situation ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
Theories Of Justice ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
Traditional Understanding

This chapter discusses contractualist theories of justice that, although they rely explicitly on moral assumptions in the traditional understanding of morality, employ rational choice theory for the justification of principles of justice. In particular, the chapter focuses on the dispute between Rawls and Harsanyi about the correct choice of principles of justice in the original position. The chapter shows that there is no winner in the Rawls–Harsanyi dispute and, ultimately, formal methods alone cannot justify moral principles. This finding is significant for the development of the rational decision situation that serves for the derivation of the weak principle of universalization for the domain of pure instrumental morality.

Economics is whatever the comparative advantage of economists is: a comment on Leeson (2020)

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 553-556
Author(s):  
Ryan H. Murphy
Keyword(s):  
Rational Choice ◽  
Comparative Advantage ◽  
Rational Choice Theory ◽  
Choice Theory ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Applied Econometrics ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Comparative Advantages

AbstractLeeson (2020) objects to the conflation of economics with applied econometrics, and argues that economics instead should be thought of as the implications of the assumption that individuals maximize, i.e. rational choice theory. But, narrowly defining economics in terms of method demands that we ignore alternative theoretical frameworks which potentially hold explanatory power about topics thought of as economics, all for the sake of a definition. I suggest that applying rational choice theory and applying econometrics became the comparative advantage for economists relative to other social scientists by accidents of history. These comparative advantages largely persist. It is reasonable to call applications of both rational choice theory and econometrics to topics outside conventional economic topics ‘economics’ simply because these applications remain the comparative advantage of economists.

Islamist Rationality: An Assessment of the Rational Choice Approach

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 584-608 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gamze Çavdar
Keyword(s):  
Rational Choice ◽  
Rational Choice Theory ◽  
Choice Theory ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
Ideological Change ◽  
Choice Approach

AbstractA growing body of literature criticizes the notion that Islamism is sui generis and argues that it could be explained by existing conceptions about human behavior. This approach relies on rational choice theory and its derivatives, characterizing Islamists as rational political actors that engage in cost-benefit analysis and strategic calculation. This article evaluates the explanatory power of this characterization through three case studies, namely the Turkish Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi), the Jordanian Islamic Action Front (Jabhat al-Amal al-Islami), and the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan al-Muslimun). It argues that although the approach offers explanations for Islamist pragmatism, this characterization has three major limitations: lack of room for ideological change, extreme voluntarism between violence and non-violence, and lack of insight for intra-group gender relations.

scholarly journals Capital theory and rational choice

Sociologija ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-204
Author(s):  
Natasa Golubovic
Keyword(s):  
Rational Choice ◽  
Rational Choice Theory ◽  
Choice Theory ◽  
Economic Science ◽  
Marxian Theory ◽  
Social Phenomena ◽  
Capital Theory ◽  
The One ◽  
The Individual

Almost from the very beginning of economic science the notion of capital has been the subject of numerous controversies. The main reason for the concept's controversial nature is that it explains interest and profit. In Marxian theory, where 'manner of production' determines forms of activities, mutual relationships and life of individuals, capital appears as a social phenomenon i.e. social relation. Goods and money are not capital by themselves but become capital in the capitalist way of production. Economics mainstream is based on methodological individualism upon which explanation of social phenomena and processes must be derived from individual behavior and motivation. Capital, therefore, is not a product of capitalism as a socially and historically specific form of economic organization, but is rather perceived as connected to the individual and his or her rational behavior. Rational choice is the basic and sometimes the only explanatory factor in the neoclassic theories of capital. Although theories of human and cultural capital point out the interdependence between individual activity and choice on the one hand, and social position on the other hand in the process of capitalization, the connection remains in the background and somehow unclear. A more explicit indication of the interdependence between social structure and choice can be found in the theory of social capital. The goal of this paper is to explore the role of rational choice theory in explaining the nature of capital.

Exploitation and Rational Choice

2011 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 635-661
Author(s):  
Loren King
Keyword(s):  
Rational Choice ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Rational Choice Theory ◽  
Choice Theory ◽  
Explanatory Power

Abstract.Critics fault rational choice theory for dubious assumptions and limited explanatory power. The aims of rational choice are, however, as much normative as explanatory, and I argue that an abiding concern of political thought—the wrong of exploitation—gives moral weight to some of the more substantive assumptions underlying many rational choice prescriptions.Résumé.Les critiques reprochent à la théorie du choix rationnel d'avancer des hypothèses douteuses et d'offrir des explications restreintes. Les objectifs du choix rationnel sont, cependant, aussi bien normatifs qu'explicatifs. J'affirme qu'une préoccupation centrale de la pensée politique – le mal de l'exploitation – donne une signification morale à certains postulats du choix rationnel.

Rational Choice Theory and the 1990 Party Merger in South Korea

OUGHTOPIA ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 247-282
Author(s):  
In-Kyun Kim ◽  
Myeong-Geon Koh
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Rational Choice ◽  
Rational Choice Theory ◽  
Choice Theory

POLITICS-LAW CONVERGENCE OR DIVERGENCE? 'SMALL' POLITICAL PARTIES, REALPOLITIKAND SOUTH AFRICA'S 20 YEARS OF DEMOCRACY

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kealeboga J Maphunye
Keyword(s):  
Game Theory ◽  
Political Parties ◽  
Rational Choice ◽  
Significant Role ◽  
Rational Choice Theory ◽  
Choice Theory ◽  
Democratic Consolidation ◽  
Secondary Research ◽  
Extant Literature ◽  
African Charter

This article examines South Africa's 20-year democracy by contextualising the roles of the 'small' political parties that contested South Africa's 2014 elections. Through the  prism  of South  Africa's  Constitution,  electoral legislation  and the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance, it examines these parties' roles in South Africa's democratisation; their influence,  if any, in parliament, and whether they play any role in South Africa's continental or international engagements. Based on a review of the extant literature, official documents,  legislation, media, secondary research, reports and the results of South Africa's elections, the article relies on game theory, rational choice theory and theories of democracy and democratic consolidation to examine 'small' political parties' roles in the country's political and legal systems. It concludes that the roles of 'small' parties in governance and democracy deserve greater recognition than is currently the case, but acknowledges the extreme difficulty experienced by the 'small'  parties in playing a significant role in democratic consolidation, given their formidable opponent in a one-party dominant system.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document