This is not the first decade that has attracted public interest considered by the theory of rational choice problems. This trend originated among the social sciences, at first it was widely spread among American sociologists, then it interested Japanese specialists and Scandinavian scientists. This approach is considered realistic, shows itself as reliable in a high degree. It is used to suggest 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 to the theory of rational choice that sharp criticism is especially common. Some people 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, in the framework of which Touren declared that all supporters of the direction under consideration undermined the universalism of knowledge - sociology. Similar accusations were made to postmodernists. Turen said that they 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 provisions of the new direction have caused so much controversy, it makes sense to consider briefly the theory of rational choice. So called 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 some decision. The behavior strategy mainly follows from the possibilities, limitations, determined by the context of the situation, within which the decision maker is located.
Used in sociology, applied in political science, the theory of rational choice 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 Downs, Coleman. These scholars specialize in modern economic studies, which they have called rational choice. In the framework of the theory, they consider how to act in order to be rational. Theorists of the new direction specialize in sociological theories, seeking to predict the behavior of individuals and groups of people. Theory is not just a means of explaining or suggesting the behavior of individuals. So, you can resort to it, if you need to assume how the electorate will behave, what choice this group will make.
Important points
Used in sociology, in political science, the theory of rational choice is a general science, which includes various versions of the theory of action aimed at formulating the 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 the actions of these objects are always rational, their main goals are ensuring security and gaining power. But external actions due to nature are usually erratic, although exceptional situations are possible.
In many ways, for the representatives of the scientific community developing the theory of rational choice, the provisions of Smith, which laid the foundation for political economy in its classical form, are important. They rely on the basic ideas of Weber, the author of understanding sociology; no less important sayings, works of Morgenthau. In the framework of the scientific direction under consideration, scientists are trying to explain complex social activities through abstraction and the formation of a model. Previously it was believed that the application of the provisions of the theory was promising when taking into account the analogy with Newtonian mechanics. At present, matmodels are still recognized as worthy and useful for theory, but explanations in which the reasons for what is happening are considered priority.
About Models
In the theory of rational choice (economic, political, consumer), the classical concepts of “Economic Man” are used. Along with them apply ideas about the "Inventive Man", which are officially called RREEMM. In them, the person is assessed 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 the sociologists involved in this theory seek to determine what the preferences of a rational object are, it has not yet been possible to come to a single conclusion. There is no unity of opinion between specialists in this field.
About goals
Quite curious are the provisions that give an idea of the theory of rational choice and its characteristics formulated by Friedman, who published his works on the topic under consideration in 2001. This prominent scientist speaks of instrumental rationality as a means of effective analysis and the ability to correlate goals and objectives of a person, group. The analysis is carried out in order to increase their chances of success to the maximum, to achieve the desired. First, the need is determined to achieve something, after which attempts are made to get to this as efficiently as possible (taking into account external factors).
Within the framework of the theory of rational choice, the goal is something predetermined. Rationality refuses to analyze the meaningfulness, value of some action. It forces the use of predetermined methods for evaluating outcomes. They do not change, whatever the behavior. Often goals are determined by choice. In the classical description of an object, goals are determined by preferences and depend on utility. Take into account that the content of goals is different - it is not limited by anything. Rational can be those who commit evil, and aspiring to altruism in the highest form.
Instrumental rationality
Within the framework of the theory of rational choice, general and special provisions traditionally attract the attention of both opponents of this direction and its followers. The instrumental rationality they consider may imply optimization, but not always. Optimization is a fairly common tool. If limiting factors and goals are formulated as mathematical relationships that are reasonably logical and predictable, then instrumental rationality is as close as possible in essence to optimization. However, it does not introduce boundaries for the content of goals. In economic models you can see preferences. But the structure of preferences is usually limited by rationality. Goals are streamlined in order to solve problems as efficiently as possible. Otherwise, you simply cannot find a suitable solution.
The theory of rational choice (consumer, political, economic) requires the use of the most effective goals, effective when taking into account the agreed goal. This rule forms a number of restrictions on the structure, but does not affect the content, 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 theories of rational choice. Research in this area is especially important for forensic scientists, as well as people involved in suicide. The cause of deviant behavior is the psychosomatic inferiority of a 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 intelligent, at first thinks, only after that acts. Of course, there are exceptions in the form of reckless acts and an insane state, an unintentional commission of an action. But more often the main reason for the behavior is the will of the person. Accordingly, it is safe to say that rational choice is the reason for deviant behavior. This theory is most supported by those who prefer to use the criminal law model, focused 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 outside world. It is direct, indirect. Sociologists consider this approach to assessing human behavior the most reasonable and justified. In addition to the theory under consideration, it is adhered to in the provisions on social relations, learning, anomies, subcultures. Similar positions are known sociological theory of relations, stigmatization, social inequality.
About application
The theory of rational choice is often applied to the theory of demand. It is considered: the actor has certain preferences. They are characterized by orderliness and utility, predetermined by the agent. Preferences are considered as complete, monotonous, transitive. Rationality turns into an attempt to explain the situation in two ways. On the one hand, the goals are necessarily rational, correspond to the minimum conditions. The character acts rationally in order to achieve his own goals. Choosing, taking into account the concept of rationality, the participant in the situation thereby receives goals, chooses preferences through those.
Economic and 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 mainly believe: a scientific field is required that describes the regulatory aspects. They distinguish a positive economics theory, specializing in what is happening, normative, fixing how everything should happen. The theory under consideration in economics is part of both directions.
Regulatory tradition is associated with ethics. What seems for granted follows from moral notions. Economists have different calculations devoted to such identification. Quite curious in this aspect of Cayce's work, in 1890 he spoke about the impossibility of mixing the positive and the normative in science. He admitted the existence of an ideal of rationality, beautiful and simple, different from that observed in reality and not determined by morality.
Curious points
In 2006, MacPherson could read conclusions on the theory under consideration. This is evaluated as a determining condition, which corresponds to the choice of purpose. In order to identify racial preferences, they determine how to choose rationally - this is formulated in a work written in collaboration with Houseman.
The science under consideration, as indicated in a work published by the same authors in 2008, is among the normative ones, not being moral, since rationality is relevant to good and evil equally. The authors noted: the subject who is not able to define something rationally is not immoral, but stupid. Normative theory points to rules of behavior, but not real actions. Conflicting theories of accomplishment speak of the inability of people to rational behavior, but in no way indicate the fallacy of the idea.
Ross regulations and more
Ross dealt with the theory under consideration in the aspect of philosophical problems solved by the social sciences. Traditional concepts make it possible to formulate a rational choice as generalizing, applicable to many philosophers, and being normative. Ross notes that the scientific statement says how an ideal race subject acts. For economists, the same theory, as Ross pointed out in 2005, is useful as an aspect of descriptive science that provides insight into the real behavior of people.
In 2001 and three years later, Davidson dealt with aspects of race theory. He notes that the laws by which decisions are made cannot be empirical attempts to generalize the behavior of subjects. These laws only determine what being rational means from the point of view of some author. Davidson acknowledges the presence of a strong norm-aspect, which is important when there is some application for which actions are realized, beliefs are formulated. In Davidson's calculations, certain features are traced that are clearly characteristic of philosophical works of recent times. He simultaneously criticizes science, analyzing it as positive, at the same time interpreting it as normative.
Empirical flaws are relatively often illustrated from the standpoint of normative interpretation, while methodology does not oblige to consider normative theory. A normative understanding of the theory does not exclude the use of rational choice for characterizing real behavior. True, this understanding comes into conflict with the perception of normative theory as ethical, and race choice as positive.