Teorijski modeli racionalnog ponašanja u savremenoj ekonomskoj nauci

Abstract

The consequences of selecting alternatives spurred scientists to create theories of rational decision-making. Until the 20th century, there were a relatively small number of decision- making and rational choice theories. This pattern was changed radically in the 20th century when the first models of rational behaviour emerged, primarily in the theory of operational researches, and then in rational choice theory. In the c o n t e m p o r a r y e c o n o m i c s s c i e n c e , the principle of rationality is characterized by subjectivity and narrowness. In comparison with the neoclassical direction, contemporary economics science fundamentally changed the paradigm of rationality. Supporters of cont emporar y economi cs s ci ence renounced the useless “demarcation” between the rationality and irrationality (logical/ illogical) of behavior and focused on the subjective determination of rationality. If children prefer to watch TV and not to study, they act subjectively and rationally, although in 10 years’ time they will have a different opinion. After all, there are potentially as many “rationalities” as there are people on the Earth. Attention of researchers, with bounded as features of rationality, is focused on two essential deficits of neoclassical theory. Neoclassical theory interprets the role of transaction costs in a rational economy in the wrong way. Specifically, in the neoclassic model of rational choice, transaction costs eqvals zero. Even famous philosophers, such as Weber and Schumpeter, presumably did not pay attention to these moments. According to Weber’s typology, only conscious focusing on the ultimate goal and conscious choice of means of its realisation are considered to be rational. Therefore, Weber makes a distinction between the “traditionally rational” behaviour on the one hand, and “traditionally irrational and affective behavior”, on the other. Nevertheless, both “traditionally irrational” behaviour and partly affective behaviour can be rational. If the analysis includes the time constraint, it becomes clear that in some trivial situations it is often more rational to make a decision immediately, and then to behave irrationally, provided there is no reasonable cause for rational behaviour. No matter whether we talk about eating with a fork and a knife, or with chopsticks, combing our hair in the morning or tidying our room, etc., these are all cases where traditional behaviour is rational. Just as M. Weber, Schumpeter could not bring the principles of rationality to a logical end. Schumpeter, for example, kept on using the term “field of rationality” in explaining entrepreneurs’ behaviour. Furthermore, he confused the term “rationality in conditions of incomplete information” with the term “irrational and variable behaviour”. The contemporaly economics science have made up for all those flaws concerning the definition of rationality, and it has brought the rationality principle to its logical end, recognising the important role that time, transaction costs, expenses and information have in everyday decisions.