This is a paperback edition of a major contribution to the field, first published in hard covers in 1977. The book outlines a general theory of rational behaviour consisting of individual decision theory, ethics, and game theory as its main branches. Decision theory deals with a rational pursuit of individual utility; ethics with a rational pursuit of the common interests of society; and game theory with an interaction of two or more rational individuals, each pursuing his own interests in a (...) rational manner. (shrink)

An important book, one that can truly be called seminal. --America In a popular, informal style, the Jesuit author of many theological books and articles explores the question of interpersonal commitments . . . His book should do much to clarify a great deal of muddy thinking on a critical issue. --Library Journal Haughey is not addressing one life-style, but is writing for all, since all of us are committed to someone or something. His book is carefully written and deserves (...) careful reading. --Best Sellers John C. Haughey, SJ, is the author of 'The Holy Use of Money' and 'Should Anyone Say Forever?'. (shrink)

When von Neumann's and Morgenstern's Theory of Games and Economic Behavior appeared in 1944, one thought that a complete theory of strategic social behavior had appeared out of nowhere. However, game theory has, to this very day, remained a fast-growing assemblage of models which have gradually been united in a new social theory - a theory that is far from being completed even after recent advances in game theory, as evidenced by the work of the three Nobel Prize winners, (...) class='Hi'>John F. Nash, John C. Harsanyi, and Reinhard Selten. Two of them, Harsanyi and Selten, have contributed important articles to the present volume. This book leaves no doubt that the game-theoretical models are on the right track to becoming a respectable new theory, just like the great theories of the twentieth century originated from formerly separate models which merged in the course of decades. For social scientists, the age of great discover ies is not over. The recent advances of today's game theory surpass by far the results of traditional game theory. For example, modem game theory has a new empirical and social foundation, namely, societal experiences; this has changed its methods, its "rationality. " Morgenstern (I worked together with him for four years) dreamed of an encompassing theory of social behavior. With the inclusion of the concept of evolution in mathematical form, this dream will become true. Perhaps the new foundation will even lead to a new name, "conflict theory" instead of "game theory. (shrink)

Sir John Hicks is one of the most important and influential economists of the twentieth century. Awarded the Nobel Prize for economics in 1972, he has made contributions across a wide range of economic theory, writing some twenty books. Arguably the most important of these, _Value and Capital_, is seen as the roots of modern microeconomics and general equilibrium theory. Hicks possessed an unusual ability to synthesize the ideas of other economists – something that is evident in his invention (...) of the ‘IS-LM’ diagram to expound Keynes’ General Theory, and is perhaps what he is best known to present day economists for. This two volume set is the second collection on Hicks in this series and includes new assessments of his contributions, covering the last fifteen years. With a new introduction by the editor, this comprehensive and scholarly collection provides students and scholars immediate access to Sir John Hicks’ contributions. (shrink)

In this essay I consider how God is related to possible worlds from a classically evangelical and Reformed perspective, contending that God’s essential perfections determine what is genuinely possible. I then consider briefly three views that take God to be a significant delimiter of possible worlds and offer some defense of one of those views, the view that there are many genuinely possible worlds that are equally and unsurpassably good and that God might have chosen to actualize. I conclude by (...) noting two significant implications of my position, one epistemological and the other concerning the problem of evil. (shrink)

It is now a commonplace that premodern reflection, whether mythical, philosophical, or theological, was terminally “anthropomorphic,” given to the erroneous supposition that the human shape offers genuine insight into the shape of everything else.1 It is also commonly assumed that modern philosophy distinguishes itself from its precursors by placing the human being at the center of its concerns. Thus Kant, for example, claimed that the question “what is man?” recapitulates the whole of systematic philosophical inquiry.2 First impressions notwithstanding, these two (...) convictions are not really at odds. For it is precisely through their “turn to the subject” that modern thinkers…. (shrink)

In his book Engineered Death: Abortion, Suicide, Euthanasia and Senecide, John Woods uses an argument from analogy to establish the following conclusion: even if one grants that foetuses are not persons but only potential persons, killing foetuses is murder. Murder, according to Woods, is the defeasibly wrongful violation of the right to life ascribed to persons. If this argument is successful, it would of course have profound consequences for the ongoing philosophical debate over the morality of abortion. Whether or (...) not they hold that foetuses are persons, philosophers would be forced to adopt the same moral attitude toward foeticide as they would adopt toward the killing of persons. That is, the killing of foetuses and the killing of persons would be defeasibly wrong in the same way; their wrongfulness could be defeated only in special and limited circumstances, perhaps like those suggested by Judith Thomson in her “Defense of Abortion”. (shrink)

En primer lugar, este artículo ofrece una breve sinopsis del acervo disponible en el área del desarrollo moral, una visión que combina las contribuciones de Lawrence Kohlberg y de Martin L. Hoffman a esta área. Luego, reconociendo que para explicar el comportamiento moral se necesitan constructos o variables adicionales, se centra sobre los avances que yo y un buen número de colegas y colaboradores hemos alcanzado en cuanto a la comprensión y tratamiento del comportamiento antisocial en jóvenes. Esto incluye una (...) descripción detallada de algunas características comunes básicas de estos jóvenes: retrasos en el desarrollo del juicio moral; distorsiones cognitivas interesadas o egoístas ; y deficiencias en cuanto a habilidades sociales. También se incluye la discusión de un caso ilustrativo; información sobre un instrumento de medida —el cuestionario Cómo Pienso ; e información sobre un exitoso enfoque de tratamiento, el Programa equipo. Finalmente, se subrayan las profundas conexiones teóricas y prácticas entre la percepción moral verídica, y el tratamiento del comportamiento antisocial a través de los principios de la confianza, la justicia y la democracia. (shrink)

Traces the development of the human consciousness and argues that many scientific theories of human nature denigrate the value of humanity.

The 2001 and 2012 National Science Foundation surveys of public attitudes and knowledge about science were used to model perceptions of scientists and explore whether the predictors of such perceptions have changed over time. The available data indicate that the relative impact of the available predictors changed in only minor ways between the two time periods. Predictors of views about scientists include age, gender, and scientific knowledge, regardless of time period. Science museum attendance and primary source of science news were (...) only rarely significant predictors. A limitation of the modeling is that the available predictors do a relatively poor job predicting both positive and negative views about scientists. This may suggest the need to reconsider which questions get included in the biennial National Science Foundation science and technology survey or the measures used to assess views about scientists. (shrink)