Abstract

The term ‘rational choice’ has great impact on the life of a rational agent. Rational choice helps the agent to understand her capability of making choice and the intentional involvement for working on a particular aspect considering certain circumstances. At the same time, this creates a lot of dilemmas in terms of understanding the freewill of the agent while being committed for a work. Following this, Amartya Sen’s discussion on this subject seems relevant where Sen very prominently reflects on the point that rational choice involves freedom, rationality, and normativity. These three features are coherent with each other and with the absence of one it seems helpless to define the choice of a rational person intrinsically. The process of integration is very much important in order to characterize a choice as a ‘rational choice’. Failed to do so will surely define a person as not rational but a ‘rational fool’ as claimed by Sen. The aim of this paper is to rethink the discussion made by Amartya Sen where Sen is keeping himself into the Aristotelian Lane while defining the choice of a rational agent is not only to think about the self-interest rather going forward to act on commitment.