IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ajecsc/v63y2004i1p207-211.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Public Choice and Philosophy Should Not Learn from One Another

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Sugden

Abstract

ABSTRACT. Lomasky offers accounts of public choice and of political philosophy, in which these disciplines have complementary theories of motivation, and suggests that each discipline can learn something from the other. This note argues that these two theories of motivation share a common weakness: an a priori, non‐empirical mode of analysis. Political philosophy models human beings as rational moral agents; public choice theory treats individuals as rationally self‐ interested. Neither theory is concerned with the psychology of actual human motivation. This common feature facilitates the transfer of ideas between the two disciplines, but it limits the usefulness of both. There is more to political motivation than can be captured by theories of reason.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Sugden, 2004. "What Public Choice and Philosophy Should Not Learn from One Another," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(1), pages 207-211, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ajecsc:v:63:y:2004:i:1:p:207-211
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1536-7150.2004.00283.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.2004.00283.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1536-7150.2004.00283.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brennan, Geoffrey & Lomasky, Loren, 1985. "The Impartial Spectator Goes to Washington: Toward a Smithian Theory of Electoral Behavior," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(2), pages 189-211, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Elias L. Khalil, 2001. "Adam Smith and Three Theories of Altruism," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 67(4), pages 421-435.
    2. Werner Güth, 2005. "On Inequity Aversion," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2005-24, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    3. Gebhard Kirchgässner & Tobias Schulz, 2005. "Expected Closeness or Mobilisation: Why Do Voters Go to the Polls? Empirical Results for Switzerland, 1981 – 1999," CESifo Working Paper Series 1387, CESifo.
    4. Brad Taylor, 2015. "Strategic and expressive voting," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 159-170, June.
    5. Loren Lomasky, 2022. "Collaboration as communication: writing with Geoffrey Brennan," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 193(3), pages 127-132, December.
    6. Mihai UNGUREANU & Andra ROESCU, 2015. "Economic models of voting: an empirical study on the electoral behavior in Romanian 2012 parliamentary elections," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania / Editura Economica, vol. 0(3(604), A), pages 63-74, Autumn.
    7. repec:agr:journl:v:3(604):y:2015:i:3(604):p:63-74 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ajecsc:v:63:y:2004:i:1:p:207-211. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0002-9246 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.