Much of the debate concerning rational choice theory (RCT) is fruitless because many
people (both critics and defenders) fail to correctly understand the role it plays
in developing explanations of social phenomena. For the most part, people view
rational choice theory as a species of intentional explanation; on the best
available understanding, however, it should be viewed as contributing to the
construction of straightforward causal explanations. Debate concerning RCT can
progress in a worthwhile manner only once this point is correctly understood. Once
it is, many common critiques are easily answered, but at the same time, the
ambitions of some rational choice theorists are deflated.
Elster, J.1979. Ulysses and the Sirens: Studies in Rationality and
Irrationality.
New York: Cambridge University Press
.
6.
Elster, J.1983a. Explaining Technical Change: A Case Study in the Philosophy
of Science.
New York: Cambridge University Press
.
7.
Elster, J.1983b. Sour Grapes: Studies in the Subversion of Rationality.
New York: Cambridge University Press
.
8.
Elster, J.1986. ‘Introduction.’ In
Rational Choice, ed.
Jon Elster
, pp. 1-33.
New York: New York University Press
.
9.
Elster, J.1989. Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences.
New York: Cambridge University Press
.
10.
Elster, J.2000. ‘Rationality, Economy, and
Society.’ In The Cambridge Companion to Weber, ed.
Stephen Turner
, pp. 21-41.
New York: Cambridge University Press
.
11.
Feinberg, J.1993. ‘Psychological Egoism.’ In
Reason and Responsibility: Readings in Some Basic Problems of
Philosophy, ed.
Joel Feinberg
, pp. 461-472.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing
.
12.
Gibbons, R.1992. Game Theory for Applied Economists.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
.
13.
Green, D. P.
and
I. Shapiro
. 1994. Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory: A Critique of
Applications in Political Science.
New Haven, CT: Yale University Press
.
14.
Hempel, C.1965. Apects of Scientific Explanation.
New York: The Free Press
.
15.
Luce, R. D.
and
H. Raiffa
. 1957. Games and Decisions: Introduction and Critical
Survey.
New York: Wiley
.
16.
MacDonald, P. K.2003.
‘Useful Fiction or Miracle Maker: The Competing Epistemological
Foundations of Rational Choice Theory.’American Political Science Review97:
551-565
.
17.
Merton, R.1957. Social Theory and Social Structure.
New York: The Free Press
.
18.
Morrow, James D.1994. Game Theory for Political Scientists.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
.
19.
Nash, J. F.1951.
‘Non-Cooperative Games.’Annals of Mathematics54:
286-295
.
20.
Pettit, P.1993. The Common Mind: An Essay on Psychology, Society, and
Politics.
New York: Oxford University Press
.
21.
Posner, E. A.2000. Law and Social Norms.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
.
22.
Satz, D.
and
J. Ferejohn
. 1994.
‘Rational Choice and Social Theory.’Journal of Philosophy91:
71-87
.
23.
Searle, J. R.2001. Rationality in Action.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
.
24.
Segal, J. A.
and
H. J. Spaeth
. 2002. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model
Revisited.
New York: Cambridge University Press
.
25.
Sidgwick, H.
[1907] 1981. The Methods of Ethics.
Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing
.
26.
Simon, H.1982. Models of Bounded Rationality, vol. 2.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
.
27.
Stinchcombe, Arthur L.1968. Constructing Social Theories.
New York: Harcourt Brace & World
.
28.
Turner, Jonathan H.2003. The Structure of Sociological Theory, 7th ed.Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning
.
29.
von Neumann, J.
and
O. Morgenstern
. [1943] 1953. The Theory of Games and Economic
Behavior, 3rd ed.New York: John Wiley
.
30.
Watkins, J. W. N.1959.
‘Historical Explanations in the Social Sciences.’British Journal for the Philosophy of Science8:
104-117
.
31.
Whitmeyer, J. M.1994.
‘Why Actor Models are Integral to Structural Analysis.’Sociological Theory12:
153-165
.
