A. A. Mavrinag
Abraham Kaplan
Arbitration Agreement
authoritative
Authoritative Instructions
Behavioral Assumptions
Bristol Speech
Carl J. Friedrich
Category=JPF
Category=QDTS
Charles E. Lindblom
Distributive Ethics
end
eq_bestseller
eq_isMigrated=1
eq_isMigrated=2
eq_nobargain
eq_non-fiction
eq_society-politics
Equal Doctrine
False Unanimity
Felix E. Oppenheim
Formal Decision Rule
Gottfried Dietze
Great Political Families
Greatest Happiness Principle
Harvey G. Mansfield
Heinz Eulau
Homicidal Lunatics
ideological critique
Inductive Inferability
Inexact Reasoners
instructions
J. Roland Pennock
John Ladd
John's Attorney
John’s Attorney
judicial
Judith N. Shklar
legal
legal reasoning
legislative rationality
Margaret Spahr
Mathematical Expression
means
Means End Schema
Means End Statements
moral judgment analysis
Mos Geometricus
Murray L. Schwartz
National Interest
Paul A. Freund
political philosophy
practical
Practical Syllogism
process
rationality in political decision making
Reason Incarnate
Republic
Res Public
schema
Sir Isaiah Berlin
social decision processes
syllogism
Violate
William K. Frankena
Young Man
Product details
- ISBN 9780202309743
- Weight: 385g
- Dimensions: 152 x 229mm
- Publication Date: 15 Mar 2007
- Publisher: Taylor & Francis Inc
- Publication City/Country: US
- Product Form: Paperback
Secure
checkout
Fast Shipping
Easy returns
To a historian the most interesting thing about decisions is the fact that everyone talks about them. No one interested in social ideas can fail to notice how large a part the word "decision" has come to play in the vocabulary of moral and political discourse. It meets one on every page. Inevitably one asks, "Why?" Why is there so much talk of decisions and of those who are said to make them? Are there any ideological reasons for it?In asking such questions, and in offering "ideology" as an explanation, nothing complex or pejorative is implied by Friedrich. He uses "ideology" to refer to personal responses to what is regarded as a prevalent social situation and to the efforts to critically explain and evaluate that situation, whether the latter be real, imagined, or a bit of both. An investigation of the ideological aspects of political concepts is, clearly, not the only way to explain them, but this and similar genetic explorations can show us how and why large numbers of people come to concentrate on specific issues.If such explorations can tell us little about the validity of political ideas, they can still provide a degree of self-understanding without which political thought is apt to become complacent, irrelevant, and excessively abstract. There is nothing denigrating in recognizing the ideological perimeter within which political ideas move. It will seem so to only those of us who identify the worth and rationality of our thinking with its remoteness from our own experiences, and especially from those that we share with our less reflective neighbors.The topic of rational decision-making presents the student of philosophical politics with the vast and inexhaustible problem of rationality in its relation to decision-making. The present interest in decision-making among social scientists has tended to apply inadequate attention to the application of rationality to the process.
