Blackwell Reference Online

Extract

One of the most noteworthy phenomena in recent social science is the upsurge of a theory, and/or methodology, called “rational choice.” Originally confined to economics, it has recently spread to political science and sociology, and even to anthropology. Rational choice is so called because it is based on the assumption that human beings are rational in their choice of means to reach their preferred ends (see Elster 1986). It has been common, among rational choice theorists, especially economists, to assume that the “ultimate end” of human beings is utility-maximization (Arrow 1987:204ff.), but there is also the less demanding assumption of consistent preferences (Riker 1990:172). There is no single, commonly accepted, version of rational choice, but a family of different versions, united by resemblance, and based upon different conceptions of rationality (Sen 1990, Sugden 1991). It is not my business, here, to scrutinize the different versions of rational choice, or add to the existing plethora of definitions of rationality. My interest, in this article, is in the use, rather than the exact meaning, of rational choice theory. More precisely, my interest is in certain philosophical or methodological aspects of rational choice, as used by social scientists. For this purpose, “rational choice” is, roughly, whatever goes by that name in the history of social science.It is possible ... log in or subscribe to read full text