For more than a decade now, public interest has been attracted by the problems considered by the theory of rational choice. This direction originated among the social sciences, first spread widely among American sociologists, then interested Japanese specialists and Scandinavian scientists. This approach is considered realistic, shows itself to be reliable to a high degree. It is used to guess how people, groups of people will behave. Today in the scientific community there are those who zealously support the direction, as well as its categorical opponents.
Curious fact
As you can see from media reports, it is often the theory of rational choice that is most often criticized. Some of those who adhere to this trend believe that rational choice is a methodology that can completely supplant classical sociology. This, of course, provokes numerous disputes. In 2002, a sociological congress was organized at the international level, during which Touraine stated thatas if all supporters of the direction under consideration undermine the universalism of knowledge - sociology. Similar accusations were made against postmodernists. Touraine said that it is they who violate the unity of the dominant theory and prevent the creation of universal sociological knowledge.
What are they arguing about?
To understand why the positions and positions of the new direction have caused so much controversy, it makes sense to briefly review rational choice theory. This was the name of the methodological approach, the main idea of which affects the social environment. The situation in society, according to representatives of a relatively young direction, is clearly structured by the alternatives that the participants see - groups or individuals. Accordingly, it is precisely such alternatives that are most significant for participants who are forced to make a decision. The strategy of behavior mainly follows from the possibilities, limitations, due to the context of the situation, inside which the decision-maker is located.
The theory of rational choice used in sociology, used in political science, is classified by a general direction that studies the rational behavior of the subject. The authors were Olson, Becker. An important contribution was made by Downes and Coleman. These scientists specialize in modern economic research, which they called the rational choice. Within the framework of the theory, they consider how it is necessary to act in order to be rational. Theorists of the new direction specialize in sociological theories, seeking to predictbehavior of individuals and groups of people. Theory is not only a means of explaining or suggesting the behavior of individuals. So, you can resort to it if you need to guess how the electorate will behave, what choice this group will make.
Important provisions
Used in sociology, in political science, rational choice theory is a general science that includes various versions of the theory of action aimed at formulating provisions due to which some behavior can be called rational. Certain assumptions inherent in this direction can be seen in the works of Thucydides. It follows from them that the main subjects of international politics are states, all actions of these objects are always rational, their main goals are to ensure security and acquire power. But external actions due to nature are usually disorderly, although exceptional situations are possible.
In many respects, for the representatives of the scientific community who develop the theory of rational choice, the provisions of Smith, who laid the foundation for political economy in its classical form, are important. Rely on the basic ideas of Weber - the author of understanding sociology; no less important are the sayings, the works of Morgenthau. Within the framework of the scientific direction under consideration, scientists are trying to explain complex social activities through abstraction and model formation. Previously, it was believed that the application of the provisions of the theory is promising, taking into account the analogy with Newton's mechanics. At present, mathematical models are still recognized as worthy and useful for theory, butexplanations in which the reasons for what is happening are formulated.
About models
The theory of rational choice (economic, political, consumer) uses the classical concepts of "Economic Man". Along with them, ideas about the "Inventive Man" are used, which are officially called RREEMM. In them, the person is evaluated as having limitations, able to evaluate and wait, striving for the maximum. This model for the sociology of our days is considered more modern. Although sociologists involved in the theory under consideration seek to determine what the preferences of a rational object are, so far it has not been possible to come to unified conclusions. There is no unanimity of opinion among specialists involved in this area.
About goals
The provisions that give an idea of the theory of rational choice and its characteristics, formulated by Friedman, who published his works on this topic in 2001, are rather curious. This prominent scientist speaks of instrumental rationality as a means of effective analysis and the ability to correlate goals and tasks facing a person or a group. The analysis is carried out in order to increase your chances of success to the maximum, to achieve the desired. First, the need to achieve something is determined, after which attempts are made to achieve this as efficiently as possible (taking into account external factors).
In rational choice theory, a goal is something that is predetermined. Rationality refuses to analyzemeaningfulness, the value of some action. It forces the use of predetermined ways of evaluating outcomes. They don't change, whatever the behavior. Often goals are determined by choice. In the classical description of an object, goals are determined by preferences, depend on utility. It is taken into account that the content of the goals is different - it is not limited by anything. Rational can be those who do evil, and those who strive for altruism in the highest form.
Instrumental rationality
In the framework of rational choice theory, general and special provisions traditionally attract the attention of both opponents of this trend and its followers. The instrumental rationality they consider may imply optimization, but not always. Optimization is a fairly common tool. If the limiting factors and goals are formulated as mathematical relationships that are quite logical and predictable, then instrumental rationality is as close as possible in its essence to optimization. However, it does not introduce boundaries for the content of goals. In economy models, you can see preferences. But the structure of preferences is usually limited by rationality. Goals are ordered in order to solve problems as efficiently as possible. Otherwise, a suitable solution simply cannot be found.
The theory of rational choice (consumer, political, economic) obliges to apply the most effective goals that are effective when taking into account the specified goal. This rule forms a number of restrictions on the structure, but does not affectcontent, that is directly preferences.
Not everything is standard
For more than a decade, sociologists have been thinking about the possibility of explaining deviant behavior in rational choice theories. Research in this direction is especially important for criminologists, as well as those involved in the problems of suicide. The cause of deviant behavior is the psychosomatic inferiority of the person, received from birth or in the process of life. This approach is traditional for bioanthropological theory. At the same time, they take into account that a person is reasonable, at first he thinks, only after that he acts. Of course, there are exceptions in the form of careless acts and an insane state, an unintentional act. But more often the main reason for behavior is the will of the person. Accordingly, it is safe to say that rational choice is the cause of deviant behavior. Such a theory is most supported by those who prefer to apply a criminal law model centered on the personality of the individual.
In the theory of rational choice, the main cause of deviation is considered to be the influence of the external world. It is direct and indirect. Sociologists consider this approach to assessing human behavior the most reasonable and justified. In addition to the theory under consideration, it is followed in provisions on social ties, learning, anomie, and subcultures. Sociological theories of connections, stigmatization, social inequality are known for similar provisions.
About application
Rational choice theory is often applied to demand theory. It is assumed that the actor has certain preferences. They are characterized by orderliness and utility, predetermined by the agent. Preferences are considered as complete, monotonic, transitive. Rationality turns into an attempt to explain the situation in two ways. On the one hand, the goals are necessarily rational, meet the minimum conditions. The actor acts rationally in order to achieve certain goals. Choosing, taking into account the concept of rationality, thus the participant of the situation receives goals, chooses through such preferences.
Economic-philosophical aspects
The theory of rational choice is perceived as positive, giving a description, prediction, explanation of the behavioral reactions of individual participants in the situation. Economists predominantly believe that a scientific field is needed that describes the normative aspects. Allocate a positive economics, specializing in what is happening, normative, fixing how everything should happen. The theory under consideration in economics is part of both directions.
The normative is traditionally associated with ethics. What is taken for granted follows from moral notions. Economists have different calculations on this identification. Quite curious in this aspect of the work of Case, in 1890 he spoke about the impossibility of mixing positive and normative in science. He allowed the existence of an ideal of rationality, beautiful and simple, different fromobserved in reality and not conditioned by morality.
Curious positions
In 2006, MacPherson could read conclusions on the theory in question. This is assessed as determining the conditions that correspond to the choice, the goal. In order to identify rational preferences, they determine how to choose rationally - this is how it is formulated in a work written jointly with Houseman.
The science in question, as indicated in the work of the same authors published in 2008, belongs to the number of normative ones, without being morality, since rationality is relevant to good and evil equally. The authors noted that a subject unable to determine something rationally is not immoral, but stupid. Normative theory points to rules of conduct, but not to actual actions. Conflicting completion theories speak of people's incapacity for rational behavior, but in no way indicate that the idea is wrong.
Ross provisions and more
Ross de alt with the theory under consideration in the aspect of philosophical problems solved by the social sciences. Traditional concepts make it possible to formulate rational choice as a general one, applicable to many philosophers, and being normative. Ross notes that the scientific statements say how the ideal race subject behaves. For economists, the same theory, as Ross pointed out in 2005, is useful as an aspect of descriptive science that provides insight into the actual behavior of people.
In 2001 and three years later, aspects of the theoryRatsvybor was engaged in Davidson. He notes that the laws on which decisions are made cannot be empirical attempts to generalize the behavior of subjects. These laws only define what it means to be rational from the point of view of some author. Davidson recognizes the presence of a strong norm aspect, which is important when there is some application for the sake of which actions are implemented, beliefs are formulated. In Davidson's calculations, certain features are traced that are clearly characteristic of the philosophical works of recent times. He simultaneously criticizes science, analyzing it as positive, at the same time interpreting it as normative.
Empirical shortcomings are relatively often illustrated from the position of normative interpretation, while the methodology does not oblige to consider normative theory. The norm understanding of the theory does not exclude the usefulness of rational choice for characterizing real behavior. True, such an understanding conflicts with the perception of normative theory as ethical, and rational choice as positive.
