Politics and the Economist-King: Is Rational Choice Theory the Science of Choice?
Abstract This article is another unapologetic contribution to ‘the gentle art of rational choice bashing’. The debate over rational choice theory (RCT) may appear to have tired out; yet RCT is as dominant in political sciences as ever. The reason is that critics typically take aim at the symptoms of...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de documento: | Recurso Electrónico Artigo |
| Idioma: | Inglês |
| Verificar disponibilidade: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Publicado em: |
2004
|
| Em: |
Journal of moral philosophy
Ano: 2004, Volume: 1, Número: 2, Páginas: 177-196 |
| Acesso em linha: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000naa a22000002c 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1817473263 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20220927053004.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 220927s2004 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1177/174046810400100204 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1817473263 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1817473263 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Landemore, HÉlÈne |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Politics and the Economist-King: Is Rational Choice Theory the Science of Choice? |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2004 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract This article is another unapologetic contribution to ‘the gentle art of rational choice bashing’. The debate over rational choice theory (RCT) may appear to have tired out; yet RCT is as dominant in political sciences as ever. The reason is that critics typically take aim at the symptoms of RCT’s failings, rather than their root cause: RCT’s very ambition of being the ‘science of choice’. In this article I argue that RCT fails twice, first as a science ofchoiceand then as ascienceof choice. Both failures suggest that political sciences need an epistemologic (re)conversion away from the Platonic ideal of a deductive and universal science of choice toward a more inductive and pluralist paradigm. While advocates of RCT rightly insist that ‘you can’t beat something with nothing’, I take their advice, with a grain of salt: in order for alternatives to appear, the frame of references needs to be modified. I draw a few perspectives for the political sciences. | ||
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of moral philosophy |d Leiden : Brill, 2004 |g 1(2004), 2, Seite 177-196 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)474382281 |w (DE-600)2169771-1 |w (DE-576)273875329 |x 1745-5243 |7 nnas |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:1 |g year:2004 |g number:2 |g pages:177-196 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1177/174046810400100204 |x Resolving-System |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://brill.com/view/journals/jmp/1/2/article-p177_4.xml |x Verlag |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 935 | |a mteo | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 4192066262 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1817473263 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20220927053004 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 220927||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 035 |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-09-22#217EB5098E5F630D704DC2AFABC0B568ED2A21FF | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixrk |a zota | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||
