The first textbook to present a framework of the Behavioral Political Science paradigm for understanding political decision-making.

Philosophy, economics, and decision theory have long been dominated by the idea that rational choice consists of seeking or achieving one's own greatest good. Beyond Optimizing argues that our ordinary understanding of practical reason is more complex than this, and also that optimizing/maximizing views are inadequately supported by the considerations typically offered in their favor. Michael Slote challenges the long-dominant conception of individual rationality, which has to a large extent shaped the very way we think about the essential problems and nature of rationality, morality, and the relations between them. He contests the accepted view by appealing to a set of real-life examples, claiming that our intuitive reaction to these examples illustrates a significant and prevalent, if not always dominant, way of thinking. Slote argues that common sense recognizes that one can reach a point where "enough is enough," be satisfied with what one has, and, hence, rationally decline an optimizing alternative. He suggests that, in the light of common sense, optimizing behavior is often irrational. Thus, Slote is not merely describing an alternative mode of rationality; he is offering a rival theory. And the numerous parallels he points out between this common-sense theory of rationality and common-sense morality are then shown to have important implications for the long-standing disagreement between commonsense morality and utilitarian consequentialism. Beyond Optimizing is notable for its use of a much richer vocabulary of criticism than optimizing/maximizing models ever call upon. And it further argues that recent empirical investigations of the development of altruism and moral motivation need to be followed up by psychological studies of how moderation, and individual rationality more generally, take shape within developing individuals.

Rational Choice Theory and Organizational Theory is written in response to the neo-classical economic rational choice theories and organizational economic theories which have emerged in the past decade and gained center stage in current organizational analysis.

George Akerlof, 2002 Nobel Laureate in Economics argues that: ?Neoclassical theory suggests that poverty is the reflection of low initial endowments of human and nonhuman capital. The theory cannot account for persistent and extreme poverty coupled with high incidence of drug and alcohol abuse, out-of-wedlock births, single-headed households, high welfare dependency, and crime." This book is designed to provide materials for faculty and students who want to explore the basic intellectual history of modern economics and its turn away from rigid rationality assumptions by including material that would be useful in courses and seminars taught in economics departments at all levels, law school courses and seminars. It looks beyond neoclassical theory to provide the following alternatives: An introduction to the major challenges to the neoclassical model from scholars who share a faith in market ordering with overviews of the perspectives of behavioral economics, informational economics, institutional economics, and social norms. An introduction to the major criticisms of neoclassical economics from scholars who reject the model of the market for distributing the basic necessities of life with overviews of the perspectives of humanism; feminist critiques of market theory; racial critiques of market theory; empirical evidence of persistent racial discrimination in major markets; and market socialism.

One of the world's most important political philosophers, Jon Elster is a leading thinker on reason and rationality and their roles in politics and public life. In this short book, he crystallizes and advances his work, bridging the gap between philosophers who use the idea of reason to assess human behavior from a normative point of view and social scientists who use the idea of rationality to explain behavior. In place of these approaches, Elster proposes a unified conceptual framework for the study of behavior. Drawing on classical moralists as well as modern scholarship, and using a wealth of historical and contemporary illustrations, Reason and Rationality marks a new development in Elster's thinking while at the same time providing a brief, elegant, and accessible introduction to his work.

With Beyond Rationality, Kenneth R. Hammond, one of the most respected and experienced experts in judgment and decision-making, sums up his life's work and persuasively argues that decisions should be based on balance and pragmatism rather than rigid ideologies.Hammond has long focused on the dichotomy between theories of correspondence, whereby arguments correspond with reality, and coherence, whereby arguments strive to be internally consistent. He has persistently proposed a middle approach that draws from both of these modes of thought and so avoids the blunders of either extreme. In this volume, Hammond shows how particular ways of thinking that are common in the political process have led to the mistaken judgments that created our current political crisis. He illustrates this argument by analyzing penetrating case studies emphasizing the political consequences that arise when decision makers consciously or unconsciously ignore their adversaries' particular mode of thought. These analyses range from why Kennedy and Khruschev misunderstood each other to why Colin Powell erred in his judgments over the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. For anyone concerned about the current state of politics in the U.S. and where it will lead us, Beyond Rationality is required reading.