Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T07:29:07.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - Exploring Sen on self-interest and commitment

from Part II - Inclusiveness, Social and Individual Agency

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2024

By
Gay Meeks
Edited by
Flavio Comim ,
P. B. Anand  and
Shailaja Fennell
Flavio Comim
Affiliation:
Universitat Ramon Llull
P. B. Anand
Affiliation:
University of Bradford
Shailaja Fennell
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Get access

Summary

This chapter explores aspects of Sen’s analysis of self-interest and commitment, seeking to highlight their interplay by probing some imagined situations. Detailing three facets of self-interest the author detects in traditional economic theory and the two forms of committed behaviour he then identifies (not confining one’s goals to the pursuit of ones own welfare and not basing one’s choices exclusively on one’s goals at the expense of those of others), the implied eightfold pattern of interrelations between these subtle concepts is presented, illustrated by a hypothetical internet dating conundrum. Sen’s stress on the self as a reasoning, self-scrutinizing agent who may but (in contrast with much prevailing theory) need not choose on the basis of self-interest underpins an account of rational choice that pays more respect to individual freedom, with significance in economics. Using an example outlining conflicting duties and pressures UK MPs might have felt during Brexit votes, Sen’s account is defended against attacks that, through reliance on strained definitions of interests and goals, seem to over-exploit the potential malleability of language.

Keywords

Amartya Sencommitmentself-interestrationalityRational Choice Theoryagencyself-scrutinychoicepreferencesfreedom
Type
Chapter
Information
Social Choice, Agency, Inclusiveness and Capabilities , pp. 170 - 201
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baigent, N., and Gaertner, W. (1996) Never choose the uniquely largest: a characterization. Economic Theory, 8 (2): 239–49.Google Scholar
Becker, G. (1976) The Economic Approach to Human Behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baigent, N., (1981) A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Baigent, N., (1996) Accounting for Tastes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Carroll, L. (1871) Through the Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found There. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Clark, D. A., and Meeks, J. G. (2018) The canniness of ought. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 19 (1): 103–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cramp, A. (1991) Pleasures, prices and principles. In Thoughtful Economic Man: Essays on Rationality, Moral Rules and Benevolence, Meeks, J. G. (ed.): 50–73. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cudd, A. E. (2014) Commitment as motivation: Sen’s theory of agency and the explanation of behavior. Economics and Philosophy, 30 (1): 35–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, J. B. (2007) Identity and commitment: Sen’s fourth aspect of the self. In Rationality and Commitment, Peter, F., and Schmid, H. B. (eds.): 313–35. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, M., and Friedman, R. D. (1980) Free to Choose: A Personal Statement. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Gasper, D. (2000) Development as freedom: taking economics beyond commodities – the cautious boldness of Amartya Sen. Journal of International Development, 12 (7): 989–1001.3.0.CO;2-Q>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hahn, F. H. (1991) Benevolence. In Thoughtful Economic Man: Essays on Rationality, Moral Rules and Benevolence, Meeks, J. G. (ed.): 7–11. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hausman, D. M. (2005) Sympathy, commitment, and preference. Economics and Philosophy, 21 (1): 33–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, D. M. (2011) Preference, Value, Choice and Welfare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jolls, C., Sunstein, C., and Thaler, R. (1998) A behavioral approach to law and economics. Stanford Law Review, 50 (5): 1471–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Kirman, A., and Teschl, M. (2006) Searching for identity in the capability space. Journal of Economic Methodology, 13 (3): 299–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lichtenberg, J. (2014) Distant Strangers: Ethics, Psychology, and Global Poverty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Meeks, J. G. (2017) Amartya Sen (1933–). In The Palgrave Companion to Cambridge Economics, Cord, R. A. (ed.): 1045–77. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Meeks, J. G. (2018) On Sen on the capability of capabilities: the story of a not-for-profit enterprise. In New Frontiers of the Capability Approach, Comim, F., Fennell, S., and Anand, P. B. (eds.): 12–50. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pettit, P. (2005) Construing Sen on commitment. Economics and Philosophy, 21 (1): 15–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, J. (1999) Collected Papers, ed. Freeman, S. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (2001) Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, ed. Kelly, E. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmid, H. B. (2005) Beyond self-goal choice: Amartya Sen’s analysis of the structure of commitment and the role of shared desires. Economics and Philosophy, 21 (1): 51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J. R. (2001) Rationality in Action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1977) Rational fools: a critique of the behavioural foundations of economic theory. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 6 (4): 317–44.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1982) Choice, Welfare and Measurement. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1985a) Goals, commitment, and identity. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 1 (2): 341–55.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1985b) Well-being, agency and freedom: the Dewey lectures 1984. Journal of Philosophy, 82 (4): 169–221.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1987) On Ethics and Economics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1993) Markets and freedoms: achievements of the market mechanism in promoting individual freedoms. Oxford Economic Papers, 45 (4): 519–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1997) Maximization and the act of choice. Econometrica, 65 (4): 745–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1999) Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (2002) Rationality and Freedom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (2005) Why exactly is commitment important for rationality? Economics and Philosophy, 21 (1): 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. K. (2006) Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (2007) Rational choice: discipline, brand name, and substance. In Rationality and Commitment, Peter, F., and Schmid, H. B. (eds.): 339–61. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (2009) The Idea of Justice. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (2017) Collective Choice and Social Welfare, expanded edn. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1976) From substantive to procedural rationality. In Method and Appraisal in Economics, Latsis, S. J. (ed.): 129–48. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Singer, P. (2009) The Life You Can Save: Acting Now to End World Poverty. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Smith, A. (1790 [1759]). The Theory of Moral Sentiments, 6th edn. London: A. Millar [repub., with Introduction by Sen, A. K. (2009), London: Penguin].Google Scholar
Williams, B. (1973) A critique of utilitarianism. In Utilitarianism: For and Against, Smart, J. J. C., and Williams, B. (eds.): 77–150. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Williams, B. (1979) Internal and external reasons. In Rational Action: Studies in Philosophy and Social Science, Harrison, R. (ed.): 17–28. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, B. (1981) Moral Luck: Philosophical Papers 1973–1980. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×