The Conceptual Bases of The War Trap

Abstract

This article attempts to evaluate the claims of Bruce Bueno De Mesquita in The War Trap to have provided a deductive, expected utility theory of war initiation in the light of various criticisms that have been levied against him. The criticisms concern both the status of the model as a rational choice model and the evidence adduced in its support. It is suggested that the interpretation of the concept used in the theory as expected utility is both unnecessary and misleading, while the strong claim of the theory to provide necessary conditions for war initiation is refuted, not confirmed, by the evidence presented. However, a weaker, but still important claim may well be true, though only a part of the evidence presented is appropriate to support it. The assertion that the theory is a step forward in a Lakatosian Research Program, in that it explains more than its predecessors, is viewed skeptically.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Akeroyd, F. M. (1986) “A challenge to the followers of Lakatos.” British J. of the Philosophy of Sci. 37, 3: 359-362.

Bueno de Mesquita, B. (1980) “An expected utility theory of international conflict.” Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 77, 2: 347-357.

Bueno de Mesquita, B. (1981) The War Trap. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.

Bueno de Mesquita, B. (1983) “The costs of war: a rational expectations approach.” Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 77, 3: 357-375.

Bueno de Mesquita, B. (1984a) “Theory and the advancement of knowledge about war: a reply.” Rev. of International Studies 10, 1: 231-360.

Bueno de Mesquita, B. (1984b) “A critique of `A Critique of The War Trap.'” J. of Conflict Resolution 28, 2: 341-360.

Bueno de Mesquita, B. (1984c) “Forecasting policy decisions: an expected utility approach to post-Khomeini Iran.” PS (Spring): 226-236.

Bueno de Mesquita, B. (1985a) “Toward a scientific understanding of international conflict: a personal view.” International Studies Q. 29, 2: 121-136.

Bueno de Mesquita, B. (1985b) “The War Trap revisited.” Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.

10.

Bueno de Mesquita, B. , D. Newman , and A. Rabushka (1985) Forecasting Political Events: the Future of Hong Kong. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.

11.

Edwards, W. L. (1953) “Probability preferences in gambling.” Amer. J. of Psychology 66: 359-364.

12.

Kong, K. F. (1984a) “A rejoinder.” Rev. of International Studies 10, 1: 77-78.

13.

Kong, K. F. (1984b) “War and international theory: a comment on the state of the art.” Rev. of International Studies 10, 1: 41-64.

14.

Lakatos, I. (1970) “Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes,” in I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave (eds.) Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.

15.

Lakatos, I. and A. Musgrave [eds.] (1970) Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.

16.

Majeski, S. J. and D. J. Sylvan (1984) “Simple choices and complex calculations: a critique of The War Trap.” J. of Conflict Resolution 28, 2: 316-340.

17.

Nicholson, M. (1983) The Scientific Analysis of Social Behavior: A Defense of Empiricism in Social Science. New York: St. Martin's.

18.

Pay, J. (1985) “Review of The War Trap.” J. of Strategic Studies 8, 1: 109-110.

19.

Ramsey, F. P. (1928) “A mathematical theory of saving.” Econ. J. 38: 543-559.

20.

Von Neumann, J. and O. Morgenstern (1944) Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.

21.

Wagner, H. (1983) “War and expected utility theory.” World Politics 36, 3: 407-432.

22.

Zagare, F. (1982) “Review of The War Trap.” Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 76: 738-739.