URMI and its Integration into a framework for Ethics in Economics
Utility, Rationality and Methodological Individualism (URMI) are the dominant aspects which determine the paradigm of ethics applicable in economic decision making process. Generally, in traditional economics the decision-making process for individuals has no significant space for ethics as individuals are only interested in maximizing their profits. URMI is a very important concept the formulation of which into various combinations determines different functions for ethics in economics. Economists have used different definitions for the constituents of this concept but there can not be sighted noteworthy effort to integrate these multi dimensional phenomena into a framework for ethics in economics. This paper integrates different approaches about URMI and chalk out a framework for incorporating ethics into economics.
|Date of creation:||15 Jul 2013|
|Date of revision:|
|Publication status:||Published in INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS No 8.3(2011): pp. 798-803|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 2008.
"Men, Women and Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence,"
Handbook of Experimental Economics Results,
- Arrow, Kenneth J, 1994. "Methodological Individualism and Social Knowledge," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(2), pages 1-9, May.
- Brennan, Timothy J., 1993. "The Futility of Multiple Utility," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(01), pages 155-164, April.
- Broome,John, 1999.
"Ethics out of Economics,"
Cambridge University Press, number 9780521644914.
- Hausman, Daniel M & McPherson, Michael S, 1993. "Taking Ethics Seriously: Economics and Contemporary Moral Philosophy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 671-731, June.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:48344. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.