The limits of individualism are not the limits of rationality

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (2):164-165 (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Individualism fixes the unit of rational agency at the individual, creating problems exemplified in Hi-Lo and Prisoner's Dilemma (PD) games. But instrumental evaluation of consequences does not require a fixed individual unit. Units of agency can overlap, and the question of which unit should operate arises. Assuming a fixed individual unit is hard to justify: It is natural, and can be rational, to act as part of a group rather than as an individual. More attention should be paid to how units of agency are formed and selected: Are the local processes local or nonlocal? Do they presuppose the ability to understand other minds?

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,757

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
67 (#317,499)

6 months
10 (#427,773)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Team Reasoning and Collective Intentionality.Björn Petersson - 2016 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 8 (2):199-218.
Social heuristics that make us smarter.Susan Hurley - 2005 - Philosophical Psychology 18 (5):585 – 612.
Why Change the Subject? On Collective Epistemic Agency.András Szigeti - 2015 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 6 (4):843-864.
Libertarian Paternalism And Susan Hurley's political philosophy.Ittay Nissan-Rozen - 2024 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 67 (6):1570-1596.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references