Work

Rationality, preference satisfaction and anomalous intentions: why rational choice theory is not self-defeating

Year: 2021

Type: article

Abstract: The critics of rational choice theory (henceforth, RCT) frequently claim that RCT is self-defeating in the sense that agents who abide by RCT’s prescriptions are less successful in satisfying their preferences than they would be if they abided by some normative theory of choice other than RCT. In this paper, I combine insights from philosophy of action, philosophy of mind and the normative foundations of RCT to rebut this often-made criticism. I then explicate the implications of my thesis for the wider philosophical debate concerning the normativity of RCT for both ideal agents who can form and revise their intentions instantly without cognitive costs and real-life agents who have limited control over the formation and the dynamics of their own intentions.

Source: Theory and Decision

DOI: 10.1007/s11238-021-09801-8

Author: Roberto Fumagalli

Institutions: King's College London, University of Pennsylvania, London School of Economics and Political Science

Language: English

Topic: Philosophical Ethics and Theory

Subfield: Philosophy

Field: Arts and Humanities

Domain: Social Sciences

Open Access status: hybrid

Estimated APC paid: $2,780

Funders: London School of Economics and Political Science, King's College London, University of Oxford, Universität Hamburg