SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

The Sociological Perspective: Rational Choice Theory



Table of Contents

Introduction3

Discussion3

Definition4

Application of Rational Choice Theory5

Rational Choice Theory and Game Theory7

Conclusion12

References14

The Sociological Perspective: Rational Choice Theory

Introduction

Rational choice theory deduces models of social life from the assumption that individuals act to maximize the satisfaction of their personal preferences. Although it is sometimes called the economic approach to politics, also draws heavily on the neoclassical approach to micro-economics, it also makes extensive use of decision theory and game theory. The purpose of this paper is to discuss sociological perspective and I have selected “Rational Choice Theory” in this regard. My knowledge of the “Rational Choice Theory” has helped me greatly to understand the social world on both a macro and micro level. The basic objective of this theory is to show that macro-level outcomes can be clarified by micro-level ideas of rational actors.

Discussion

The exact nature of the assumptions made by rational choice theory remains a matter of discussion. The most noteworthy discussion is perhaps over whether or not rational choice theory assumes that people are selfish. Critics sometimes suggest it does. Technically, however, rational choice theory is agnostic over the content of people's preferences: it assumes that people act rationally in accordance with whatever preferences they have, and it deduces the content of their preferences as being revealed by their actions. Nonetheless, although rational choice does not technically assume that people are self-interested, its exponents are generally unable to apply their models to real-world situations without assuming that people have individual preferences, and at this point, they do tend rather blithely to assume that people are selfishly concerned with their own wealth, status, and power. (Barry, 2008)

Definition

Rational choice theory offers one of the leading ways of thinking about social coordination in general and about the new governance in particular. At a very general level, rational choice theorists often try to explain the stability of social and political coordination and cooperation, given that their theory seems to imply that individuals will break up such stability as soon as it is in their interests so to do. One explanation is that the state or another authority creates incentives and disincentives such that individuals have an interest in sustaining a fixed order. This explanation leaves unanswered the question of how orders remain stable in the absence of any higher authority, and so the question of how a higher authority could arise in the first place. Hence rational choice theorists often discuss issues of governance in philosophical terms. They hope to reconcile self-interest, the existence of coordination, and the absence of any enforcement mechanism. (Barry, 2008)

In more concrete terms, rational choice theory has been applied to the changing nature of contemporary governance. There are, for example, rational choice models of the ways in which bureaucrats influence the process of public sector reform. Some rational choice theorists adopt a budget maximization model. They assume that bureaucrats increase their status and salary by maximizing the budget and size of their departments. They conclude that bureaucrats try to expand their departments even if there is no good reason for them to do ...