Varieties of ‘rationality’ and the question of their continued theoretical relevance

IF 1.9 4区 社会学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Tibor Rutar
{"title":"Varieties of ‘rationality’ and the question of their continued theoretical relevance","authors":"Tibor Rutar","doi":"10.1177/0539018420964166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The notion of ‘rationality’ has always been one of the more controversial social-scientific ideas. Today there exist many conceptual varieties of rationality which are often less than clearly distinguished and the precise intellectual import of which likewise tends to be opaque. In this article I draw on classical and contemporary examples from sociology, political science and economics in the effort to clarify the many meanings of the notion and to demonstrate that it is more useful as well as more legitimate for explanatory purposes than some canonical critiques suggest. As the behavioral economics revolution has made clear, many varieties of rationality are both empirically and theoretically limited or outright falsified. However, although it is now certain that rationality cannot be the singular basis of a universal, general theory of social behavior, I argue it can and should form one important part of a larger conceptual toolbox upon which a social theorist can draw when devising tractable theoretical explanations of social phenomena.","PeriodicalId":47697,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Information Sur Les Sciences Sociales","volume":"59 1","pages":"542 - 562"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0539018420964166","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Science Information Sur Les Sciences Sociales","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018420964166","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

The notion of ‘rationality’ has always been one of the more controversial social-scientific ideas. Today there exist many conceptual varieties of rationality which are often less than clearly distinguished and the precise intellectual import of which likewise tends to be opaque. In this article I draw on classical and contemporary examples from sociology, political science and economics in the effort to clarify the many meanings of the notion and to demonstrate that it is more useful as well as more legitimate for explanatory purposes than some canonical critiques suggest. As the behavioral economics revolution has made clear, many varieties of rationality are both empirically and theoretically limited or outright falsified. However, although it is now certain that rationality cannot be the singular basis of a universal, general theory of social behavior, I argue it can and should form one important part of a larger conceptual toolbox upon which a social theorist can draw when devising tractable theoretical explanations of social phenomena.
“理性”的多样性及其持续的理论相关性问题
“理性”的概念一直是比较有争议的社会科学思想之一。今天,存在着许多理性的概念变体,这些变体往往不太清楚,其精确的智力输入也往往是不透明的。在这篇文章中,我引用了社会学、政治学和经济学的经典和当代例子,试图澄清这个概念的许多含义,并证明它比一些经典批评所暗示的更有用,也更合法。正如行为经济学革命所表明的那样,许多理性的变体在经验和理论上都是有限的或完全被证伪的。然而,尽管现在可以肯定的是,理性不可能是一个普遍的、一般的社会行为理论的单一基础,但我认为,它可以而且应该成为一个更大的概念工具箱的重要组成部分,社会理论家在设计对社会现象的可处理的理论解释时可以借鉴这个工具箱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Social Science Information is an international peer reviewed journal that publishes the highest quality original research in the social sciences at large with special focus on theoretical debates, methodology and comparative and (particularly) cross-cultural research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信