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?

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,590

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
55 (#97,283)

6 months
6 (#1,472,471)

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