Suchergebnisse

Defends rational choice models in terms of philosophy of science, the usefulness of the rational actor assumption, and the application of rational choice models to the study of revolutions. (Abstract amended)

In reply to Grafstein's comments (ibid), examines anew the interrelation between positive theory and hermeneutics, and reconsiders (using Grafstein's example--analytical Marxist theory) the limits to application of rational choice models. (Abstract amended)

A review essay on a book by James Coleman, Foundations of Social Theory (Cambridge, MA: Harvard U Press, 1990 [see IRPS No. 63/92c01569; also see listing in IRPS No. 88]). Coleman attempts to reconcile rational choice theory with classical sociological concerns: the relationship between the individual & society, & the historical & normative status of rationality. He identifies limits to the rational choice model & suggests some promising but ultimately unconvincing ways around them. His project does, however, offer an important critique of Max Weber's theory of bureaucracy, which is of value in analyzing relationships between corporate actors & particular persons. 28 References. Adapted from the source document.

A discussion of Saguiv A. Hadari's critique of rational choice models (see abstract in this section). Hadari uses a multilevel approach that covers the debate from the broad area of philosophy of social science to the level of specific rational choice models. Here, the levels of Hadari's critique are traced, starting with the philosophy of social science, moving to the concept of rationality assumption, & finally examining the research application of the assumption. In Rational Choice In Social Theory, Saguiv A. Hadari (Wake Forest U, Winston-Salem, NC) agrees with Grafstein's comments on the usefulness of rational choice models, but challenges Grafstein's assumption of a disjunction between positive theory & hermeneutics & reconsiders the limits to the application of rational choice models, using an example from analytical Marxist theory. 18 References. Modified HA

Feminism and rational choice theory have both been hailed as approaches with the potential to revolutionize political science. Apart from a few exceptions, however, work utilizing these two perspectives rarely overlaps. This article reviews their main contributions and explores the potential for a combined approach. It argues that a synthesis of feminism and rational choice theory would involve attending to questions of gender, strategy, institutions, power, and change. The contours and benefits of this approach are illustrated with reference to one particular area of research: the adoption of electoral gender quotas. Despite a current lack of engagement across approaches, this example illustrates that the tools of feminist and rational choice analysis may be brought together in productive ways to ask and answer theoretically and substantively important questions in political science.

The heated debates about rational choice theory (RCT) in political science raise many issues but follow up on few of them.This book therefore discusses RCT's fundamental assumptions and methodology, the value and use of models, and the use of theories in science, enabling a more nuanced evaluation of both the theory's potential and limits.