Contemporary rational-choice theory thus claims dominion over all human
thought and action. Politics, economics, democracy, and all manner of inter-
action takes place on a rational basis, in accordance with rational-choice foun-
dation of all social laws, which arise from the natural rational-choice essence
of the human species.
This applies no less to religion than anything else.
Rational Choice Theory – Properly Qualified
Rational choice theory did not begin in the social sciences, but rather, in math-
ematics. Early attempts include a series of papers by John Forbes Nash in his
Essays on Game Theory([1953] 1997). Although game theory introduced the
notion of rational-choice, game theory as such remained far more modest, at
least among mathematicians, whereas rational-choice theory as such moved
onto its own tangent, which became more ambitious and eventually, at least
among its proponents in the social-sciences, all-encompassing.
In game theory, early developers such as Nash ([1953] 1997) and Luce and
Raiffa (1958) premise “the game” as a series of moves. Each move constitutes
one possible course of action, that, when chosen, precludes the other possi-
ble courses of action. Since in most situations many moves are possible, the
person makes a choice, and this selection of a particular move over and
against the others depends on the available information – sometimes this
information is complete, sometimes not, but the person decides the move
based on whatever information they have. A sequence of choices (moves)
constitutes a play, which in social terms would be such things as lifestyles,
political or economic agendas, educational and career choices, romantic part-
ners, and so on. Each step of the way, the person pursues a course of ratio-
nal utility, such that each move-selection, each step of the way as the game
proceeds, may thus be called a rational choice.
However, game theory from mathematics emphasizes one decisive point
that contemporary rational-choice theorists in the social sciences utterly ignore.
For game theorists, rationality, or rational-choice, depends on various miti-
gating factors, most importantly, one’s value system, through which one eval-
uates the available information. In game theory, there is no such thing as
abstract and universal rationality:
Certain cautions must be maintained in interpreting this concept [rational
utility]. One alternative possesses a larger utility than another because it is
more preferred, not the other way around. (Luce and Raiffa 1958:38)The Concept of Choice in the Rise of Christianity • 227