The issue then, is not only rationality itself, but also, what sort of values
shape a person’s priorities, and thus for that person (or group) which choice
constitutes the preferredchoice, and in accordance with those values, there-
fore, the preferred outcome. The larger utility, the more preferred choice,
depends on the values that shape the decision-making framework. Expediency
and cost-benefit are only two of many possible value systems. This means
that there can be, and typically is, more than one type of choice and action
which depend on one’s frame of reference. Cost-benefit calculation is one
value reference, but as Alexander Pushkin famously wrote, “Better the illu-
sions that exalt us than a thousand mundane truths.” Feeling also counts.
In sociology, Max Weber (1978:24–25) sorted out different types long ago.
Weber ’s concept of instrumental rationality most closely resembles “rational
utility” from mathematics and rational-choice theory. Weber defines instru-
mental rationality as actions “determined by expectations as to the behavior
of objects in the environment and of other human beings. These expectations
are used as conditions or means for the attainment of the actor ’s own ratio-
nally pursued and calculated ends” (Weber 1978:24). That is, the person holds
the quickest, most efficient and expeditious path towards an objective goal
as the top priority, the most expedient means of accomplishment. The goal
itself is not key here, but rather, the means by which the person strives towards
it. It is the rationality of calculated procedure.
In other works, namely the Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, Weber
argues that instrumental rationality, an attitude of rational calculation, rose
to hegemonic prominence only with the rise of increasing calculated ratio-
nality generally, and capitalism specifically (Weber [1920] 2001). For Weber,
instrumental rationality is the defining logic of modernity specifically, and
definitely not some universal truth of humanity, in either a social or natural
state. Rational choice theorists today thus strive to prove their theory in pre-
modern contexts, as Stark attempts with the rise of Christianity, to counter
critics that rational choice (that is, utilitarian instrumental rationality) is not
just a modern phenomenon, but a universal fact of social life.
As Weber argues, the rise to prominence of one type does not automati-
cally mean the demise of the others. Throughout his career, in various speeches
(See “Science as a Vocation” and “Politics as a Vocation” in Gerth and Mills
1958) and in a closing section of the Protestant Ethic, Weber wonders what
will become of humanity if nothing else remains except narrow expert spe-
cialization and cold calculation. Consistent with his professional perspective,
228 • George Lundskow