The Problem with Utility: Toward a Non-Consequentialist/Utility Theory Synthesis
- 1 March 1999
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis Ltd in Review of Social Economy
- Vol. 57 (1), 4-24
- https://doi.org/10.1080/00346769900000024
Abstract
I develop the argument that our current decision-making framework, utility theory, when used by itself, is 1) descriptively incomplete, 2) theoretically flawed, and 3) ethically questionable. In response, I offer an exploratory framework that incorporates both consequentialist and non-consequentialist motivations. Adding a commitment function provides a synthesis which remedies the problems associated with the sole use of utility theory. Finally, I show how philosophers Immanuel Kant, W.D. Ross, and Martin Buber provide an ethical basis for the framework.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Why care where moral intuitions come from?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1994
- Correct decisions and their good consequencesBehavioral and Brain Sciences, 1994
- Nonconsequentialist decisionsBehavioral and Brain Sciences, 1994
- The Futility of Multiple UtilityEconomics and Philosophy, 1993
- A Methodological Assessment of Multiple Utility FrameworksEconomics and Philosophy, 1989
- Selfishness examined: Cooperation in the absence of egoistic incentivesBehavioral and Brain Sciences, 1989
- The Case for a Multiple-Utility ConceptionEconomics and Philosophy, 1986
- Moral Hazard in TeamsThe Bell Journal of Economics, 1982
- The Non Sequitur of the "Dependence Effect"Southern Economic Journal, 1961
- The Nature of the FirmEconomica, 1937