IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ajecsc/v40y1981i1p17-36.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Reconsideration of the Rationality Postulate: ‘Right Hemisphere Thinking’ in Economics

Author

Listed:
  • Edward E. Williams
  • M. Chapman Findlay

Abstract

. The cardinal postulate of neoclassical economics is that individuals and entrepreneurs seek to maximize their unique positions in the world. Yet behind this postulate is an even more fundamental premise: that men are rational and can discern their own best interests. From Adam Smith on, it has been accepted that reasonable men act to maximize their own pecuniary advantage and in most economic models even the potential for irrationality is ignored. Nevertheless, it is becoming increasingly obvious from the research conclusions of other disciplines (psychology, philosophy, political science, and sociology in particular) that the simplistic notion of “economic man,” posited so often in the economics literature, is more fancy than fact. There is an implicit recognition that the neoclassical assumptions may not be correct in the developing area of economic behaviorism. The economic behaviorists, however, adopt a more general definition of rationality, substituting what might be called a “modified rationality postulate” for the global rationality assumed in neoclassical theory. As a result, their conclusions do not differ greatly from those of the neoclassicists. Fortunately, ideas are now crystallizing in psychology which may enable us to shed light on decisions which previously would have had to be classified as non‐rational, irrational, or unexplainable. Some of those ideas are explored.

Suggested Citation

  • Edward E. Williams & M. Chapman Findlay, 1981. "A Reconsideration of the Rationality Postulate: ‘Right Hemisphere Thinking’ in Economics," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 17-36, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:ajecsc:v:40:y:1981:i:1:p:17-36
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1536-7150.1981.tb01368.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.1981.tb01368.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1536-7150.1981.tb01368.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
    ---><---

    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:40:y:1981:i:1:p:17-36. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.