| Peer-Reviewed

The Relationship Between Rational Cooperation and Constrained Maximizers

Received: 6 December 2020     Accepted: 21 December 2020     Published: 28 December 2020
Views:       Downloads:
Abstract

From the perspective of actors' pursuit of rational self-interest, Gauthier's contractarianism links justice, rationality and morality, he attempts to deduce moral principles from non-moral premises by combining the method of contract theory, rational choice theory and game theory, and establish a just contract between rational actors to provide a plan of action for "How can I pursue a better life?". He tried to argue why rational actors chose to cooperate rather than from a normative point of view. He tried to prove that the actor's choice of cooperation is the result of rational choice because cooperation will improve the actor's situation. He believes that rational actors will choose to cooperate with people in a just and rational way, and rational actors will voluntarily abide by the contract and limit their behaviors in order to pursue a better social life. But his argument for cooperation lacks stability fails to fully prove why we should choose this mode of cooperation instead of that mode of cooperation and his argument for the rationality of cooperation is not convincing enough. He fails to demonstrate that collaboration is better than non-collaboration at all times, nor does he fully demonstrate that it is irrational to collaborate with actors other than constrained maximizers. Although his argument has some flaws and cannot convince all opponents, it provides us with a new answer to this question.

Published in International Journal of Philosophy (Volume 8, Issue 4)
DOI 10.11648/j.ijp.20200804.13
Page(s) 98-103
Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

Copyright

Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Gauthier, Contractarianism, Cooperation, Constrained Maximizer, Rational

References
[1] David Gauthier Morals by Agreement New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, p. 4.
[2] David Gauthier, “Reason to Be Moral?” Synthese Vol. 72 No. 1 Kurt Baier Festschrift Part I (Jul. 1987) pp. 5-27.
[3] David Gauthier, Morals by Agreement, New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, p. 167.
[4] David Gauthier, Morals by Agreement, New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, p. 80.
[5] Joseph Mendola,“Gauthier’s Morals by Agreement and Two Kinds of Rationality”, Ethics, Vol. 97, No. 4, 1987. pp. 765-774.
[6] David Gauthier, Morals by Agreement, New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, p. 7.
[7] David Gauthier, Morals by Agreement, New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, pp. 181-182.
[8] David Gauthier, “Twenty-Five On”, Ethics Vol. 123 No. 4 Symposium: David Gauthier’s Morals by Agreement (July 2013) pp. 601-624.
[9] David Gauthier, Morals by Agreement, New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, p. 8.
[10] David Gauthier, Morals by Agreement, New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, p. 19.
[11] Peter Timmerman, Moral Contract Theory and Social Cognition, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, 2014, p. 10.
[12] David Gauthier, Morals by Agreement, New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, p. 113.
[13] Robert C. Koons, “Gauthier and the Rationality of Justice”, Philosophical Studies, Vol. 76, No. 1, 1994, pp. 1-26.
[14] David Gauthier, Morals by Agreement, New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, pp. 225-226.
[15] David Gauthier, Morals by Agreement, New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, p. 226.
[16] Young-Ran Roh, “Is the Disposition of Constrained Maximization Chosen Rationally?”, Theory and Decision, Vol. 59, 2005, pp. 19-41.
[17] David Gauthier, Morals by Agreement, New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, p. 17.
[18] Frank Forman, “Reviewed Work(s): Morals by Agreement by David Gauthier”,Public Choice, Vol. 56, No. 1, 1988, pp. 89-96.
[19] Johanna Thoma,“Bargaining and the impartiality of the social contract”,Philosophical Studies, Vol. 172, No. 12, 2015, pp. 3335-3355.
[20] Neill, J. “The Gauthier Contract: Applicable or Not?” Res Publica 23, 2017, pp. 1-22.
[21] Georgia Testa, “Gauthier and theCapacity for Morality”, Res Publica 9, 2003, pp. 223-242.
[22] David Gauthier and Robert Sugden, Rationality, Justice and the Social Contract, Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1993, p. 3.
Cite This Article
  • APA Style

    Deng Siyang. (2020). The Relationship Between Rational Cooperation and Constrained Maximizers. International Journal of Philosophy, 8(4), 98-103. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijp.20200804.13

    Copy | Download

    ACS Style

    Deng Siyang. The Relationship Between Rational Cooperation and Constrained Maximizers. Int. J. Philos. 2020, 8(4), 98-103. doi: 10.11648/j.ijp.20200804.13

    Copy | Download

    AMA Style

    Deng Siyang. The Relationship Between Rational Cooperation and Constrained Maximizers. Int J Philos. 2020;8(4):98-103. doi: 10.11648/j.ijp.20200804.13

    Copy | Download

  • @article{10.11648/j.ijp.20200804.13,
      author = {Deng Siyang},
      title = {The Relationship Between Rational Cooperation and Constrained Maximizers},
      journal = {International Journal of Philosophy},
      volume = {8},
      number = {4},
      pages = {98-103},
      doi = {10.11648/j.ijp.20200804.13},
      url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijp.20200804.13},
      eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijp.20200804.13},
      abstract = {From the perspective of actors' pursuit of rational self-interest, Gauthier's contractarianism links justice, rationality and morality, he attempts to deduce moral principles from non-moral premises by combining the method of contract theory, rational choice theory and game theory, and establish a just contract between rational actors to provide a plan of action for "How can I pursue a better life?". He tried to argue why rational actors chose to cooperate rather than from a normative point of view. He tried to prove that the actor's choice of cooperation is the result of rational choice because cooperation will improve the actor's situation. He believes that rational actors will choose to cooperate with people in a just and rational way, and rational actors will voluntarily abide by the contract and limit their behaviors in order to pursue a better social life. But his argument for cooperation lacks stability fails to fully prove why we should choose this mode of cooperation instead of that mode of cooperation and his argument for the rationality of cooperation is not convincing enough. He fails to demonstrate that collaboration is better than non-collaboration at all times, nor does he fully demonstrate that it is irrational to collaborate with actors other than constrained maximizers. Although his argument has some flaws and cannot convince all opponents, it provides us with a new answer to this question.},
     year = {2020}
    }
    

    Copy | Download

  • TY  - JOUR
    T1  - The Relationship Between Rational Cooperation and Constrained Maximizers
    AU  - Deng Siyang
    Y1  - 2020/12/28
    PY  - 2020
    N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijp.20200804.13
    DO  - 10.11648/j.ijp.20200804.13
    T2  - International Journal of Philosophy
    JF  - International Journal of Philosophy
    JO  - International Journal of Philosophy
    SP  - 98
    EP  - 103
    PB  - Science Publishing Group
    SN  - 2330-7455
    UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijp.20200804.13
    AB  - From the perspective of actors' pursuit of rational self-interest, Gauthier's contractarianism links justice, rationality and morality, he attempts to deduce moral principles from non-moral premises by combining the method of contract theory, rational choice theory and game theory, and establish a just contract between rational actors to provide a plan of action for "How can I pursue a better life?". He tried to argue why rational actors chose to cooperate rather than from a normative point of view. He tried to prove that the actor's choice of cooperation is the result of rational choice because cooperation will improve the actor's situation. He believes that rational actors will choose to cooperate with people in a just and rational way, and rational actors will voluntarily abide by the contract and limit their behaviors in order to pursue a better social life. But his argument for cooperation lacks stability fails to fully prove why we should choose this mode of cooperation instead of that mode of cooperation and his argument for the rationality of cooperation is not convincing enough. He fails to demonstrate that collaboration is better than non-collaboration at all times, nor does he fully demonstrate that it is irrational to collaborate with actors other than constrained maximizers. Although his argument has some flaws and cannot convince all opponents, it provides us with a new answer to this question.
    VL  - 8
    IS  - 4
    ER  - 

    Copy | Download

Author Information
  • School of Public Administration, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, China

  • Sections