Arguments Against Rational Choice Theory

Introduction
Although rational choice theory has made considerable advances in other social sciences, its progress in sociology has been limited. Some sociologists' reservations about rational choice arise from a misunderstanding of the theory. The first part of this essay therefore introduces rational choice as a general theoretical perspective, or family of theories, which explains social outcomes by constructing models of individual action and social context. "Thin" models of individual action are mute about actors' motivations, while "thick" models specify them ex ante. Other sociologists' reservations, however, stem from doubts about the empirical adequacy of rational choice explanations. To this end, the bulk of the essay reviews a sample

The first problem with the theory has to do with explaining collective action. Rational choice theory does address behaviors that are selfless, altruistic, or philanthropic. Related to the first problem just discussed, the second problem with rational choice theory, according to its critics, has to do with social norms (Bruce, 1999). This theory does not explain why some people seem to accept and follow social norms of behavior that lead them to act in selfless ways or to feel a sense of obligation that overrides their self-interest. The third argument against rational choice theory is that it is too individualistic. According to critics of individualistic theories, they fail to explain and take proper account of the existence of larger social structures. That is, there must be social structures that cannot be reduced to the actions of individuals and therefore have to be explained in different

This distinguishes it from other forms of theory because it denies the existence of any kinds of action other than the purely rational and calculative. It argues that all social action can be seen as rationally motivated, however much it may appear to be irrational (Scott, 2000). l. Also central to all forms of rational choice theory is the assumption that complex social phenomena can be explained in terms of the individual actions that lead to those phenomena. This is called methodological individualism, which holds that the elementary unit of social life is individual human action. Thus, if we want to explain social change and social institutions, we simply need to show how they arise as the result of individual action and